Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2016

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. President, I rise today as a strong supporter of the resolution of disapproval we passed today. The WOTUS rule is a classic example of overreach. Arkansans understand that we don't need DC bureaucracies controlling our lands. That is why I stand with homeowners, small businesses, and family farmers in Arkansas in opposition to the WOTUS mandate.

Passage of this resolution today reflects the American people's rejection of this heavyhanded mandate and shows our commitment to a balanced and thoughtful approach to water quality protection. Congress needs to send this resolution to the President. The President needs to understand the opposition this power grab is facing is very real. Not only is there strong bipartisan opposition to this mandate in Congress but also in the courts and most importantly with the American people.

Last week I got an email from David in North Little Rock. David told me that he works in construction, and his email was clear. He supports protecting our Nation's waters, but David believes the Obama administration's rule will create huge problems and uncertainty for the construction industry. He said costs will increase, the industry will lose jobs, and he and others will face unnecessary delays as a result of the mandate that has nothing to do with protecting our waters.

Legal experts within the executive branch have doubts about this rule too. At a recent EPW hearing, we heard that many career experts inside the agencies, particularly the Corps of Engineers, believe this rule is wrong, but each time the Corps expresses concern that the rule went too far, the EPA and the rest of the administration refuse to make changes.

From puddles to irrigation ditches, the EPA wants jurisdiction over every body of water in Arkansas, no matter the size. These are not scare tactics, they are very real truths. In fact, the White House and the EPA are the ones engaging in scare tactics to defend this power grab. They falsely claim that this mandate is necessary to protect drinking water.

Those protections are already in place with laws like the Safe Drinking Water Act. For more than 40 years, the Safe Drinking Water Act has fostered Federal-State cooperation. It has kept our drinking water clean. It is an effective law, one I support. It does far more to protect distribution water than anything in the EPA's power grab. In case these false claims don't scare enough people into supporting this unjustified power grab, the EPA has invoked rhetoric about rivers catching on fire and claim there is rampant toxic pollution in our waterways. Again, this is simply false.

Without waters of the United States, major rivers will continue to receive Federal and State protection just as they have for decades. Isolated nonnavigable waters will continue to be protected by State and local efforts as they have in the past. The courts recognized how misguided this mandate is and have issued a temporary halt to the implementation of WOTUS. That injunction now extends to all 50 States.

I applaud the Arkansas attorney general, Leslie Rutledge, for helping to lead that challenge in the courts. Senator Cotton and I stand arm in arm with our State's attorney general in this fight. We are committed to fighting this mandate legislatively, while supporting efforts to stop it in the courts. That is why today's vote is so very important. The resolution of disapproval will nullify the waters of the United States mandate.

Arkansans understand how unnecessary this heavyhanded mandate is. We already go to great lengths to protect our State's natural resources. We must ensure that States, local communities, and private citizens remain a vital part of the process instead of giving all of the power to Washington. That is what this resolution of disapproval aims to do. I am pleased we passed it today.

I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source