Sam Graves Statement for the Record - Joint Waters of the U.S. Hearing
February 4, 2015
I would like to thank Chairman Shuster and Chairman Gibbs for working with our Senate colleagues to hold this important hearing today. It is not often we have a bicameral hearing, but given the importance of this issue and the dramatic impact this rule will have on all of our constituents, I could not think of a more timely and pressing topic to examine in coordination with our Senate counterparts on the Environment and Public Works Committee. I hope the leadership at EPA and the White House take note of the serious concerns raised in this hearing and reconsider their proposal.
From Atchison County, Missouri, where I live, to Marion County clear across my home state, I hear from people who are rightly worried about the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed "Waters of the United States" rule.
The Clean Water Act was designed in a manner that ensured the primary responsibility of land and water resources belong to States and local governments for the precise reason that a government closest to such a sensitive issue, is best equipped to handle it. However, the "Waters of the United States" rule fundamentally changes this standing and is indicative of many of the problems we see with the federal government inserting itself in local matters. By applying a Washington-knows-best mentality and an additional level of bureaucracy to an already complex issue with many variables at the local level, it creates confusion and stifles action. Under this expansive proposed rule, all tributaries, including small streams and ponds that only flow irregularly or when it rains, fall under the definition of federally-controlled waters and would be subject to the Clean Water Act's permitting and other onerous regulatory requirements.
During my time as Chairman of the House Small Business Committee, I led multiple hearings to examine the effects of the proposed "Waters of the United States" rule. It was evident that if finalized, "Waters of the United States" would have a negative economic impact on small businesses, States, and local governments.
Tom Woods, a constituent from Blue Springs, Missouri, and owner of Woods Custom Homes, testified before my Committee regarding the many ways in which the "Waters of the United States" rule is going to hurt home builders. Mr. Woods, who is the former mayor of Blue Springs, fears the significant impact the proposed rule will have on small businesses nationwide – an important notion that both the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) choose to ignore. With this in mind, I called on the EPA and Corps to withdraw the "Waters of the United States" rule.
Last year, the House of Representatives passed the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act, which would have prevented implementation of the rule and required the EPA and Corps to work with State and local governments in the development of any future rulemaking. If the EPA does not withdraw this proposal Congress will be forced to again pursue legislative action to protect family farms and small businesses from this gross overreach by the Administration.
Again, thank you to the committee leadership and our Senate colleagues for holding this important hearing today. My hope is that the concerns raised by Members of Congress and stakeholders across the country do not fall on deaf ears in the Administration.