GOP Senator questions Biden’s EPA’s multi-million dollar spending on military gear.
President Biden’s EPA Spending Millions on Military Equipment
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under President Joe Biden has raised eyebrows by using taxpayer funds to acquire military-grade hardware, including advanced combat and reconnaissance equipment. According to Senator Chuck Grassley, the EPA has already spent $2,892,770 on these items, which is 143 percent more than what was spent during the entire Trump administration.
Grassley, who is leading an oversight probe into the EPA’s spending spree, described the agency’s militarization as ”frightening.” This investigation comes after a watchdog group revealed that non-law enforcement agencies, such as the EPA and IRS, have spent nearly $4 billion in taxpayer funds since 2006 on guns, ammunition, and “military-style equipment.”
Grassley expressed concern over the EPA’s excessive use of power, stating, “The very same EPA that proposed slapping red tape on nearly every farmer’s ditch in Iowa now appears to be armed to the teeth. The Biden EPA already has a reputation for overstepping its bounds, and that makes the agency’s militarization all the more frightening. We need to know what exactly EPA is doing with this equipment, and whether it serves the interests of the American people.”
Since 2006, the EPA has spent over $10 million on advanced armaments, including unmanned aircraft, night vision, and radar equipment. The spending has increased during the Obama and Biden administrations, with $6,584,473 spent during Obama’s terms and just over $2 million during Trump’s administration. Since Biden took office, nearly $3 million more has been spent on arming the EPA.
Senator Grassley’s investigation has revealed that the EPA has stockpiled various war fighting arms, including mobile command vehicles, all-terrain vehicles, and even an unmanned ground vehicle. The agency has also purchased camouflage and deception equipment, unmanned aircraft, and employs around 200 federal law enforcement officers armed with guns and ammunition.
Grassley is demanding transparency from the EPA, requesting a full breakdown of their armaments and spending records. He wants to know the volume, cost, and statutory authority for each type of equipment purchased, as well as the number of times rifles have been used in field operations. Additionally, he aims to uncover the purpose and usage of unmanned vehicles, radar equipment, and assault ships owned by the EPA.
The issue of federal government militarization has been a topic of concern for years, and a recent audit by watchdog group Open the Books has shed light on the extent of this trend. Open the Books founder and CEO Adam Andrzejewski stated, “A culture of militarization has permeated across the federal bureaucracy. In many cases, these agencies are stockpiling the very weapons some politicians seek to ban citizens from owning.”
What steps should be taken to ensure transparency and accountability in the EPA’s acquisition and use of military-grade hardware, especially considering the concerns raised about fiscal responsibility and the agency’s core responsibilities
Y industry in the country is now arming itself with weapons and equipment normally associated with military operations. This raises serious questions about the agency’s priorities and the need for such a significant increase in firepower.”
The EPA, whose primary mandate is to protect human health and the environment, has faced criticism in recent years for overstepping its authority and implementing burdensome regulations. This latest revelation regarding its acquisition of military equipment only adds to these concerns.
Critics argue that the EPA’s focus should be on addressing environmental issues, not on arming itself with military gear. They argue that the agency’s mission should be centered on research, regulation, and enforcement, rather than possessing weapons and engaging in activities typically reserved for law enforcement agencies.
Additionally, the substantial increase in spending on military equipment under President Biden’s administration raises questions about fiscal responsibility. As the country continues to recover from the economic shock caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important for government agencies to use taxpayer funds prudently and efficiently. Spending millions of dollars on military-grade hardware may not be seen as a wise use of resources by many taxpayers.
Furthermore, the EPA’s acquisition of advanced combat and reconnaissance equipment seems unnecessary and disproportionate to the agency’s needs. While it is crucial for law enforcement agencies to have the necessary tools to fulfill their duties, it is unclear why the EPA would require such equipment. The agency’s role primarily involves carrying out scientific studies, conducting investigations, and enforcing environmental regulations, activities that generally do not necessitate the use of military-grade hardware.
Transparency and accountability are vital in government spending, particularly when it involves taxpayer funds. It is essential that the EPA provides a detailed explanation for its decision to spend millions of dollars on military equipment and justifies its necessity. Furthermore, an independent review of the agency’s spending practices may be warranted to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used in alignment with the EPA’s mission and the best interests of the public.
In conclusion, President Biden’s EPA’s decision to spend millions of dollars on military equipment has raised concerns about the agency’s prioritization of resources and its mission. With the primary responsibility of protecting human health and the environment, acquiring military-grade hardware seems excessive and unnecessary. As an agency entrusted with safeguarding taxpayer dollars, it is crucial for the EPA to provide clarity and justification for this significant increase in spending. Transparent and accountable spending practices will not only ensure the prudent use of taxpayer funds but also inspire public confidence in the EPA’s ability to fulfill its mission effectively.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...