legislative update
Jon Huffmaster, Legislative Director
Congress should rein in EPA & Corps
Photo courtesy of Bartow County Farm Bureau
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) have proposed a rule that will greatly expand the regulatory authority of these agencies under the Clean Water Act (CWA). This proposal will infringe on private property rights. The proposed rule is “Definition of ‘Waters of the United States’ Under the Clean Water Act,” which was published in the Federal Register on April 21. The
Bartow County Farm Bureau is promoting the “Ditch the Rule” campaign in its community by asking its members to post yard signs the organization had printed locally. BCFB member Tracy Greenway is pictured placing a sign in her yard.
proposal is now in the comment period. Farm Bureau opposes this rule and urges EPA and the Corps to withdraw it. Everyone who cares about private property rights should submit comments at http://www.gfb.org/ditchtherule. The purpose of a comment period is to allow citizens affected by a proposed rule to express their opinions about it. Farm Bureau’s “Ditch the Rule” campaign is designed to educate the public and ramp up opposition to the rule. We are involved in this process because part of our purpose is to defend property rights. EPA recently launched its own website called “Ditch the Myth” to promote its rule. This is an improper role for a government agency. Agencies write proposed rules and schedule comment periods so that citizens may weigh in. In this case the agencies are running a rule-promotion campaign and making the American people pay for it. The agencies took eight years to develop this proposed rule. Government lawyers and bureaucrats – our employees - have spent countless hours and taxpayer dollars leading up to this 87-page proposal. In contrast, citizens have 120 days to comment, and during this time, the agencies are orchestrating a public campaign to influence comments in their favor. EPA assures landowners the purpose of the proposed rule is only to “clarify” the agencies’ regulatory authority. However, that clarity comes at the expense of landowners because it clarifies federal authority to regulate virtually all water features in the country and the land surrounding them. At EPA’s promotional website, the agency contends, “The proposal does not protect any waters that have not historically been covered under the Clean Water Act.” The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service contradicts that claim as follows: “Proposed changes would increase the asserted scope of CWA jurisdiction… by application of new definitions, which give larger regulatory context to some
types of waters, such as tributaries.” The proposed rule defines tributaries as any water “physically characterized by the presence of a bed and banks and ordinary high water mark…which contributes flow, either directly or through another water, to a water…” of the United States. In other words, if water on a landowner’s property might eventually end up in a navigable steam, that water feature will be considered a tributary of a navigable water of the United States. The agencies further contend the bed, bank, and high water mark “can be created by ephemeral, intermittent, and perennial flows.” Webster’s New World Dictionary defines ephemeral as “lasting only one day; short-lived; transitory.” Under this definition, water flow during a heavy rain constitutes a tributary subject to federal regulation. Congress should do something about it. Congress created these agencies, Congress sets their budgets, and it is up to Congress to rein them in. There is legislation pending in Washington to do just that, and Farm Bureau supports these efforts. On June 19, Sen. John Barrasso (RWyo.) introduced S. 2496, the “Protecting Water & Property Rights Act of 2014.” The bill would prohibit the finalization of the proposed rule. Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss are cosponsors of the bill. On July 10, Rep. Reid Ribble (R-Wisc.) introduced H.R. 5071, the “Agricultural Conservation Flexibility Act of 2014.” It rolls back the interpretive rule, issued by the agencies in March, which narrowed agricultural exemptions under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. On July 11, Rep. Steve Southerland (R-Fla.) introduced H.R. 5078, the aptly named “Waters of the U.S. Regulatory Overreach Protection Act of 2014.” Similar to the Senate bill, Southerland’s bill would prohibit finalization of the proSee EPA page 8
Georgia Farm Bureau News August 2014 / 5