Risch disappointed farm bill vote to limit EPA flights lost

Idaho Republican Sen. Jim Risch is no fan of the Environmental Protection Agency’s aerial surveillance over businesses and farms.

He voted for an amendment to the Farm Bill as did 55 other senators. But the 56-43 vote didn’t meet the 60-vote requirement for amendments to the farm bill.

“If your property is going to be searched, you have a right to know about it,” Risch said. “The EPA has not been willing to provide information to property owners about these flights."

Risch also worries about the storage and use of images captured from these flights.

“It is unclear if strong standards are in place to prevent their misuse,” said Risch.

I wonder

if he's worried about "Google Earth" also?

duplicate

So why doesn't the EPA just use Google Earth instead of using YOUR taxdollars to survey private property owners?

Because

Because you need to see how conditions change over time. If you use an image that's only updated once a year, you may miss the day the CAFO diarrhea lagoons burst into the river.

CAFOs post great risks to the environment and with those great risks, they require close supervision.

Are you also against military drones, Pimp? Or only drones that protect the environment?

Daily

"You may miss the day" the lagoon overflows?
***

Well lets just hire an EPA 24hr guard to watch the lagoons constantly so you know the minute it happens.

Great risks can always be mitigated.
Try to prevent it instead of getting a picture of it from an EPA drone while it happens.

give me a break Bob and try to use some American reasoning here.

***
I am against military drones patrolling over US soil.

I'm also against ME flying my personal drone over YOUR back yard to take pictures of you and your family. You might be causing harm to your wife and children. So we'll watch you - DAILY.

You realize there is a line somewhere, right?

I'll be the first to admit your vomitus makes it harder to see.

----------

You fry wants with that?

Google earth vs flights

Google earth is not real time. Look at area near where you live and you can discern that the photos can sometimes be a few years old.

It's never worked for me

----------

You fry wants with that?

Does he feel the same way about DEA flights?

And he obviously will be a strong supporter of restrictions on the use of drones by local law enforcement too, right?

"No his mind is not for rent, to any god or government." Neil Peart

If you eliminate the flights, how will we catch the water thief

m

Wow good buddy Risch. Now if only you

were so concerned about an individuals privacy rights. Pretty strange when it comes to agri biz you will go to all ends to protect them, but not the rights of an individual. Hey, I say drone search the agri biz companies, see where they are dumping their toxic sludge and see where that feedlot run off is going. After all, this will affect the health of the American public.

60 votes?

This 60 vote threshold has to change back to 51 like it was originally intended.

Educated?

Since you value "education" so much CV, as you claim in your other recent post, here is some:

"The Constitution allows each house of Congress to set its own rules. Early on, both houses had unlimited debate provisions.... The Senate, until recently, never created such a rule. The term for the use of unlimited debate as a legislative tactic became known as a filibuster in the 1850's. The first attack on the filibuster came in 1841, by no lesser a figure than Henry Clay. It survived, though, until 1917, when the Senate adopted a rule allowing a filibuster to be stopped by a two-thirds vote. Such a vote is known as "cloture." Cloture ended the ability of a single Senator to hold up Senate business, but since a two-thirds vote can be difficult to get, it certainly did not stop the filibuster.

In 1975, the two-thirds rule was changed to three-fifths."

-USConstution.net

***
You might notice CV, your reference to 51% is not in the above story. Plus, there are lots of places the Constitution requires super-majority- for your "original intentions".

This story is not a simple vote. Those do still exist for your dear simple majority in case you don't watch CSPAN.

Good luck 'changing' this though. Maybe you can get Rocko to help you.

It should be changed

The filibuster has been abused and should be abolished. The FFs were quite clear on the limits of super majority votes. The argument against the constitutionality of the filibuster is quite compelling to me.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/is-the-filibuster-unconstitutional/2012/05/15/gIQAYLp7QU_blog.html

Rules are rules

The Senates sets the rules.

***
The Supreme Court is a little busy right now to decide on this one.