“Everywhere not constitutionally permitted. Let’s see, we can start by eliminating:
-Department of Agriculture
-Department of Health and Human Services
-Department of Energy...”
Actually, the Department of Energy manages the design, production, and control of nuclear weapons. I think we would have to consider that constitutional.
EPA and OSHA are cumbersome bureaucracies at their worst, but at their best serve a valuable function in protection of workers and the public from injury. I don’t think we want to start dumping raw chemical waste into the rivers, do we? The legislated requirements have to be implemented and enforced somewhere, so I wonder if your problem is with the agencies or with the laws they are tasked to enforce. That enforcement would reside somewhere. BATF is similar. They aren’t generally making up the laws.
If you want to eliminate the laws, that is a different matter, and the target should be the people who pass those laws, not those who enforce them.
ELIMINATE ALL GUBMINT AGENCIES, EXCEPT THE ONES THAT BENEFIT DURASELL!
Actually, they do. The BATF was originally a TAX collecting "Bureau" of the Treasury. At some point someone allowed them to carry firearms (although they aren't qualified to carry a calculator, let alone a firearm). Then, our esteemed CIC decided that they should be in Justice and thusly transferred... unconstitutionally.
The BATFE makes up their own rules and regulations on the whim, not based on any LAW. In fact, they change their policies like you and I change our socks...just ask any FFL owner. They make up the rules to fit their game.
Not only are they an unconstitutional branch of our fed-gov, they were "snuck-in" so as noone would notice.
They need to be eliminated through non finance of an unconstitutional "agency".
Example, I work for an environmental firm. We recently finished a clean-up project that cost the taxpayers of our state around $500,000. It cleaned some hydrocarbons out of groundwater, yes, but that groundwater was not a drinking water source, nor source of any other use.Eventually that groundwater may have flowed into a river, but no other uses exist downstream for probably 500 miles. The risk to public health was nill, and the cost of compliance was way over what any benefit could possibly be, and will continue to skyrocket since the site will now be monitored for ever after.
This is not an effective use of money, nor the talents of scientists. It happened soley because an EPA regulation was written, and is now enforced regardless of cost/benefit analysis. Multiply this by thousands of regualtions, and you've got a collassial waste of time, money and talent that ought to be going toward more effective uses.