Tipton Condemns New EPA Rule to Garnish Americans’ Paychecks
Jul 11, 2014
Signs Letter to Urge the EPA to Withdraw the Rule
WASHINGTON—Today, Congressman Scott Tipton (R-CO) demanded the
withdrawal of a proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule
under which the agency would garnish Americans’ paychecks to collect
fines. The EPA, which quietly published the rule in the federal register last week,
claims that the rule is not large enough to be subject to a public
comment period, and is attempting to quietly move it through without
sufficient input or oversight.“It is deeply troubling and unacceptable that the EPA, an agency with an abysmal record of overreach and abuse of its power, is now attempting to sneak through a rule to directly reach into Americans’ pockets and garnish their wages. It’s equally deplorable that it’s trying to sneak the rule through without any oversight or without even going to the public for comment,” said Tipton. “Apparently, the EPA isn’t satisfied by preventing hardworking Americans from earning a living by restricting their access to the land and to their private property rights, and issuing countless fines—many without legitimate cause or justification. Now the agency, which has time and again abused its power over individual Americans, is attempting to go even further by taking directly from their hard-earned wages without so much as a court order. I will work with my colleagues in the House and Senate to do everything possible to stop this rule from moving forward and protect Americans from federal abuse and overreach.”Tipton joined a number of his House colleagues today in a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy outlining their concerns on the proposed rule and urging that it be withdrawn.
In the letter Tipton and his colleagues wrote:
I am writing to express my deep concerns with a recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claim to have authority to "garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order.”
This claim seems to violate American citizens’ Constitutionally-guaranteed right to due process by placing the burden of proof on the debtor, rather than the agency. The process for challenging fines and wage garnishment is not satisfactory because it allows the agency to decide if the accused can even present a defense.
The increasingly punitive nature of the agency is also of concern. According to the agency’s annual reports, the amount of fines collected by the EPA has gone from $96 million in 2009 to $252 million in 2013. Though I agree stakeholders must be responsible and the EPA should enforce rules reasonably, the more than 160 percent increase in a span of only four years indicates that some of these fines may have been excessive.
The EPA has said the rule was not subject to review because it is not a "significant regulatory action." But it has recently been reported that a Wyoming homeowner was threatened with a $75,000 fine for building a pond on his property. That might seem like a drop in the bucket to a bureaucratic agency with a multi-billion dollar budget, but for the vast majority of Americans, $75,000 is a lot of money. The proposed rule would make it both more difficult to dispute such fines and provide incentive for the EPA to issue penalties against more Americans. Its impact, therefore, would certainly create “significant” hardships on affected individuals.
The agency has fast-tracked the rule to take effect on September 2nd, 2014 absent sufficient opposing comment by August 1st, 2014. I write to voice my strongest opposition to the rule and the EPA’s inadequate engagement with the public concerning it. Further, I ask that you reverse your decision and not follow through with this rule. By doing so, your agency will demonstrate respect for the right to due process under the law that is guaranteed to all Americans by the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment