WOTUS - Name change not enough

Recently, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent its proposed “Waters of the United States” (a.k.a. WOTUS) rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review—but not before changing the name to the “Clean Water Rule.” The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs received the rule on April 6 and will take 90 days to review. EPA has said for a while now the final rule will be released sometime this spring. But let’s get real: This is Washington. The White House will undoubtedly use all 90 days to review the rule and can extend the period for at least another 90 days. It’s safe to say it’ll be awhile before the final rule is published. In a nutshell, the proposed WOTUS rule grants the federal government an uncomfortable amount of dominion under EPA’s Clean Water Act. It’s no secret a large majority of America’s farmers want this rule “ditched.” Many farm groups have spoken out against the rule, telling dramatic (but truthful) stories of the problems such a rule would cause. Just a couple weeks ago, the Senate Agriculture Committee held a hearing on WOTUS. Suffice it to say, witnesses were not too pleased with the rule. EPA has continued to ignore farmers’ and ranchers’ concerns and march full steam ahead with the rule. However, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has said the final rule clarified the definition of tributaries so that erosion in an agricultural field wouldn’t be subject to the WOTUS rule. McCarthy has also said the WOTUS rule will only have jurisdiction over ditches that “function like tributaries and can carry pollution downstream—like those constructed out of streams. Our proposal talked about upland ditches, and we got feedback that the word ‘upland’ was confusing, so we’ll approach ditches from another angle.” But given EPA’s tumultuous relationship with one of the world’s greatest industries (that would be American agriculture), rural America has a hard time, and rightly so, believing much of what EPA says about exempting certain farming practices from the WOTUS rule. Last month, the U.S. Senate proved opposition to WOTUS is bipartisan. During the budget vote, the Senate passed on a 59-40 vote, a non-binding amendment, which would clarify several items that would not be subject to the anti­pollution law. Such a tight vote signals the Senate has a good shot of a filibuster-proof (60 votes) margin for future WOTUS legislation. (Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, missed the vote but would likely have supplied the 60th vote.)...more