“Federal regulations have never defined ditches and other upland drainage features as ‘Waters of the US’ but this proposed rule does”

Click here to watch Sen. Barrasso’s speech.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) called on the Senate to support his legislation to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) from finalizing their March 2014 proposed rule which would significantly expand federal authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA). 

Excerpts of his remarks

“I would like to thank my friend and colleague, the former Governor of North Dakota, now the Senator from North Dakota, who knows these issues very well, and the Senator from Kansas, who talked about the administration’s overreach and overregulation and the impact that it has on the economy of the United States.

“And, there’s very disturbing news out this morning reported by Reuters headlined ‘Bad to worse: U.S. Economy shrank more than expected in quarter one of this year.’

"The U.S. Economy contracted’—not grew, not stayed the same but contracted, ‘at a much steeper increase than previously estimated in the first quarter.

“The Commerce Department said on Wednesday that Gross domestic product fell at a 2.9% annual rate, the economy’s worst performance in five years.

“Worst performance in five years—it’s because of the overreach, the overregulation that’s coming out of this administration.

“That’s why I rise today in support with my colleagues and my colleagues who have very serious concerns about the EPA’s proposed Clean Water Act jurisdictional rule.

“Many if not all of these colleagues recently joined me in introducing the Protecting Water and Property Rights Act of 2014.

“In fact, 34 Senators have cosponsored this bill—more continue to join the important effort.

“They have joined this effort because this important and consequential legislation restricts the expansion of federal authority by this EPA, which the EPA is trying to use to encompass all wet areas on farms, ranches and suburban homes all across America.

“More specifically, this bill eliminates this Administration’s proposed rule to implement the expansion of such federal authority.  

“Through this recently proposed rule, federal agencies are attempting to expand the definition of ‘waters of the United States’. They want to include ditches and other dry areas where water flows only for a short duration after a rainfall.  But the government wants to control even that.

“Federal regulations have never defined ditches and other upland drainage features as ‘Waters of the US.’

“But this proposed rule does and it will have a huge impact on farmers, on ranchers, on small businesses that need to put a shovel in the ground to make a living. 

“The rule amounts to a federal user fee for farmers and ranchers to use their own land after it rains.

“It forces suburban homeowners to pay the EPA and Army Corps to use their backyards after a storm.

“Let’s be clear what is proposed in this rule. It takes money away from family farmers and ranchers who just want to grow crops, raise cattle, and it taxes suburban middle class families that just want to recreate in their own back yard without Uncle Sam bankrupting them for the privilege.

“This is the worst thing I could think we could do to Americans in this economy—an economy that is shrinking.

“That’s why my legislation is endorsed by both the American Farm Bureau as well as the American Land Rights Association.

“It is because they know how devastating this rule is to farmers, to ranchers, to homeowners, and to other small businesses.

“Despite what this Administration may say and has said about providing flexibility—they use that word for farmers and ranchers in the proposed rule—the farmers and ranchers of America are not deceived. They will not be misled by this administration.  

“According to the June edition of the publication National Cattlemen, an article entitled ‘EPA’s Ag Exemptions for WOTUS’—and let me just point out that the National Cattleman, it is the trusted leader and definitive voice of the beef industry—the official publication of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.  

“What that front page article says is ‘Although agricultural exemptions are briefly included, they don’t come close to meeting the needs of the cattlemen and women across the country.’ 

“The President of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, Bob McCan, stated in the article, ‘For example, wet spots or areas in a pasture that have standing water, under this rule, could potentially be affected. We’d now need permission to travel and move cattle across these types of areas.’

“The article lists some other major areas of agriculture not exempted by the EPA’s proposed rule when the article states ‘Activities not covered by these exemptions include introduction of new cultivation techniques, planting different crops, changing crops to pasture, changing pasture to crops, changing cropland to orchard/vineyard and changing cropland to nurseries.’

“Congress never intended the Clean Water Act to be used this way.

“The Senate under Democrat control never brought legislation, such as the Clean Water Restoration Act, to the floor that would have removed the word navigable from the Clean Water Act. Why? Because they knew it would have been defeated.

“In fact, 52 bipartisan members, a bipartisan group, a majority of Senators voted for the Barrasso amendment that rejected the EPA’s proposed guidance to seize all state water during the Water Resources Development Act.

“Yet this proposed rule by the Administration is circumventing Congress by effectively writing navigable out of the Clean Water Act.

“Just as troubling as ignoring Congressional intent, the proposed rule disregards the fundamental tenet embodied in two decisions of the United States Supreme Court. Those are decisions that limit federal jurisdiction. 

“It is particularly troubling that the proposed rule allows the Army Corps and EPA to regulate waters now considered entirely under state jurisdiction.

“This unprecedented exercise of power will allow the EPA to trump states’ rights, and wipe out the authority of state and local governments to make local land and water use decisions. 

“It’s particularly troubling when we have seen no evidence that the states are misusing or otherwise failing to meet their responsibilities.

“Enormous resources will be needed to expand the Clean Water Act federal regulatory program. 

“Not only will there be a host of landowners and project proponents who will now be subject to Clean Water Act’s mandates and costs of obtaining permits, but an increase in the number of permits needed will lead to longer delays in actually getting the permits.

“Increased delays in securing permits will impede a host of economic activities in 50 states,cost thousands of American jobs.

“Farming and ranching, commercial and residential real estate development, electric transmission, transportation projects, bridge repairs, energy development and mining will all be negatively affected.

“And this is at a time when the United States has seen our economy shrink and the Reuters story today talks about shrinkage much more than predicted previously.

“Regulations like this continue to damage America, damage our country, damage our families, damage our communities, damage the hardworking men and women who want to just go to work, put food on the table, raise their families go to work, but yet we have an administration that doesn’t seem to see—are blinded by a role of big government, blinded from seeing the impact that these onerous, expensive, burdensome regulations are having on the American public.

“And certainly on our economy—as pointed out today in this new release from Reuters about the shrinking of the American economy.”

###