The writer, a Wisconsin Republican, is speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.
In 1848, the search for gold triggered the first major wave of settlers to Nebraska. Americans on their way to California decided instead to stop and set up a supply outpost for explorers making the journey, with many settling in the open plains for good. Today, almost 170 years later, another resource has gripped the attention of America’s heartland: water.
The Obama administration’s sweeping new rule, dubbed Waters of the United States (WOTUS), could upend the way water is used across the country. Allegedly to protect the water supply, the Environmental Protection Agency has rewritten a long-standing regulation so that the EPA can micromanage everyone’s use of their own land, including that of farmers and ranchers.
It’s another example of Washington bureaucrats sticking their nose where it doesn’t belong. As the president arrives in Omaha to tout how his policies have helped the state, the House of Representatives will vote, and send to the president’s desk, a bill to reject this rule, which has left so many Nebraskans out to dry.
People are also reading…
If they can’t control the water on their land, farmers, ranchers and cattlemen can’t grow their crops or feed their livestock. And precisely because farmers and ranchers — and their elected representatives — know the needs of their land best, the states have long had primary authority over water that flows within their boundaries.
The Clean Water Act, passed in 1972, allows the federal government to regulate main waterways to limit pollution. But just a few months ago, the EPA’s rule expanded the definition of “main waterways” to include all adjacent bodies of water, no matter how small. In other words, streams, drainage ditches and ponds — even those on private property — are now subject to the whims and aggressions of Washington bureaucrats.
These consequences are not hypothetical. Real people have already suffered at the hand of WOTUS. Andy Johnson of Fort Bridger, Wyoming, was fined $37,500 a day by the EPA for building a pond on his land to water his horses, even though he had obtained state permits to do so. John Duarte of rural Tehama County in California was told that he broke the law simply by plowing his land. He was ordered to cease and desist immediately. “The Corps and EPA aren’t trying to micromanage farmers. They’re trying to stop farmers,” Duarte said. “They’re simply trying to chase us off of our land.”
And this could be just the beginning. Small businesses could pay steep fees just to use water on their property or to get high-priced lawyers to help them navigate multiple permitting processes.
Here’s the good news: The states are fighting back. A bipartisan group of 32 governors, including Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts, have filed lawsuits, saying the EPA’s rule rewrite is unconstitutional because it undermines the states’ primacy in water management. In addition, a number of job creators — from farmers to ranchers to manufacturers to energy and construction firms — are filing suit as well. They say the rule will needlessly increase costs.
And luckily, there is hope. In October, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily blocked the EPA from enforcing the rule until the legal challenges have been decided.
The EPA claims it is only clarifying the law, but Congress never intended the federal government to oversee tiny streams and ponds on private property.
So today the House will vote to disapprove of WOTUS by passing a bill that would cancel the rule. The president will most likely veto the bill. But it will force him to be up front with the American people about his administration’s power grabs and will set the stage for correcting these abuses in 2017.
Water is the foundation of life and a propeller of economic growth. Congress will continue to make sure that people who depend upon this indispensable resource are not imperiled by an overzealous federal bureaucracy. When the president visits to offer his ideas, remember what he’s taking away from Nebraskans.