comment: >
  
  Hershel Walker wasn't being sarcastic when he said it. He lost only by a few points. Chilling.
context: I can’t believe being “pro-clean water” is a partisan issue 😑
  Edit: Wait. Yes, I can. >
  
  I can’t believe that being pro-clean water is woke. >
  
  I wish we could roll back to when woke was used properly instead of the right wing mis-use of it. >
  
  Like past tense of wake?  Only appropriate use for me. >
  
  I was fine with it when it meant not being a total asshat and taking the feelings of the people around you into consideration. >
  
  I wonder which 16th century law the supreme court will cite to strike this one down >
  
  Where in the constituon does it say nestle can't steal and pollute your water? >
  
  The damage he did to the EPA was straight to jail worthy alone. >
  
  Also the FDA and USDA...Foodborne illness did escalate during his time.  And scientists at the USDA were fleeing when he tried forcing them to move to Kansas.
  Trumps war on food >
  
  Republicans: The quicker we destroy the planet, the sooner Jesus will come to burn everybody we hate, or makes us feel like stupid losers. >
  
  My Aunt fell the rabbit hole that is trump and actually posted a meme saying that.  I dropped her. >
  
  I was hoping the article would explain why this took so long to repeal. It didn’t. I’m glad that it happened, but so much damage occurred while waiting. >
  
  Yea the article is pretty bad, what happened was the EPA under Trump issued a more lenient definition of “water of the United States”. This allowed for developed (dredging/filling) of some wetlands which previously needed a Clean Water Act 404 permit.
  Industry was highly in favor of this as dredge and fill permits generally require the creation of new wetlands (offsets) at a ratio of anywhere from 2:1 to 10:1. This can costs millions of dollars.
  Usually an agency has broad discretion to create regulations, and therefore change them, under Chevron Deference. However, this issue has been extensively argued in court with the Supreme Court often going against precedent to side with industry (see SWANCC v. Army Core of Engineers).
  The EPA took its time repealing the regulation in order to build a strong legal defense for their ability to do so and the legitimacy of the their definition. >
  
  This is great news. >
  
  Water? Don't we have enough water already...or was that trees? >
  
  ...sarcasm right? Cause we need more of both.