WOTUS Proposal Coming

WASHINGTON (DTN) -- Senate Republicans are set to introduce legislation Thursday aimed at stemming efforts by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to implement the waters of the United States rule, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., announced during a press conference with ag journalists on Capitol Hill Tuesday.

Roberts and his staff indicated Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., plans to make an official announcement on the details of the legislation this week. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee passed the "Regulatory Integrity Act of 2015" April 26 that would withdraw the rule and require EPA to develop a new rule that takes into consideration input from state and local governments, as well as other stakeholders.

The Office of Management and Budget continues to review the rule that could be finalized yet in 2015.

Roberts said Republicans, in general, are concerned about the potential effects of increasing regulation on rural America.

"Every segment of the Kansas economy is suffering from this situation," he said. "... And obviously those in Washington think they know better with their agenda and all of the things that are going on, most people lose faith in their government. That's a tragic thing. That's a very egregious problem that we have today, and regulatory reform is one of our top issues.

"We're going to try to be very aggressive in conducting oversight. And hopefully some reforms in programs in agencies in our jurisdiction."

Rep. Colin Peterson, D-Minn., said he continues to be concerned about the efforts of environmental groups to sue the EPA and force the agency into settlements that are unfavorable to agriculture.

During a news conference Tuesday, he said members of Congress may consider using the little-used Congressional Review Act to turn back the waters of the United States rule.

The act was enacted in 1996 and gives Congress power to review new government regulations through an expedited process, by passing a joint resolution to overrule regulations. By law, Congress would have 60 days to disapprove a regulation. To do that, however, a regulation would need the president's signature, passed by a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate to override a presidential veto.

"So if they put out a rule that's as bad as what I think they're going to do, then I think we should use the Congressional Review Act," Peterson said. "I'm sure we can pass it in the House. I don't know about the Senate, or what the president would do and so forth."

One concern is that there is no clear definition of wetlands. In South Dakota, in particular, farmers already have faced a backlog in receiving wetlands determinations from the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

"We have a fundamental problem dealing with wetlands," Peterson said. "We have four agencies deciding what a wetland is. And we still, since 1985, have not been able to settle this on a lot of the farms in my district, who still do not know what is a wetland. And if this EPA rule goes through, it further muddies up the whole situation. And we'll never get this resolved. It puts everybody in a state of limbo. Like a lot of these environmental things, it actually does more harm than good."

He said he's concerned about another legislative proposal in the Senate that attempts to list waters that qualify as waters of the United States.

"When you get into that quagmire, somebody's that been out dealing with farmers, people do not know what they're getting into here," Peterson said. "You've got groups that are going to the courts with the help of the EPA, frankly, so they can then use that to justify what they're doing. So let the court come in and do it. But I don't think they will. Like the wolf situation (Endangered Species Act protection). With the wolf thing, they picked a judge here in D.C. that has no clue, and they convince her that the wolves have not been established in their entire range, and therefore they should continue under federal protection and not state protection.

"So you got a judge mucking around in this who doesn't understand the real world. You've got a similar kind of thing going on with wetlands. The EPA thinks they can't get something done politically. They get one of their friends to sue. They get some judge to make a decision, then use that as an excuse as to why they should legislate," Peterson said

Todd Neeley can be reached at todd.neeley@dtn.com

Follow him on Twitter @toddneeleyDTN

(AG/CZ)

Copyright 2015 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.