out of my depth trying to argue specifics about the EPA budget, mission, priorities, etc, but at a high level, I'd also have a hard time placing any blame for the Flint water issues on lack of EPA funding. If you have $8 billion at your disposal, and your mission is "is to protect human health and the environment -- air, water, and land", I would think you could find a way to prioritize ensuring clean, safe drinking water throughout the US within the first billion of expense.

I wouldn't up vote the post because the tone and the "typical liberal fashion" dig doesn't add to the level of discourse, but I also wouldn't call his overall point "idiotic". In fact, I think it does touch on an important point about the amount of money we spend and the lack of accountability for results that occurs throughout gov't agencies.