Issue Position: Water

Issue Position

Protecting Our Precious Water Resources

In the West, we know how valuable water is to our economy and way of life. It is one of the most precious resources in our state, and deciding how it is used should be the responsibility of state and local officials who are familiar with the people and local issues, not handed over to a federal bureaucracy. As a member of the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, which oversees funding for land management agencies and the Environmental Protection Agency, I am working to ensure that communities have adequate resources to ensure that their citizens have access to clean, safe water without unnecessary burdens being placed on them by federal agencies.

COST TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL STANDARDS

Communities across Idaho have struggled to meet the federal government's arsenic standards and are often forced to make difficult, even impossible, budget decisions in order to do so. This is why I have repeatedly cosponsored legislation that would let cities opt out of the federal arsenic standards. Unfortunately, those in Congress who support these unrealistic environmental standards have refused to even consider this legislation.

If the federal government is going to pass on these mandates to local communities, they should also provide funding to communities to meet the standards. For years I have worked with my colleagues in the Idaho Congressional Delegation to increase funding to Idaho communities to address drinking water and wastewater treatment needs, and I will continue to do so.

EXPANDING FEDERAL WATER REGULATION

In recent years there have been efforts by both Congress and the Administration to amend the current version of the Clean Water Act by removing the term "navigable waters" from the law and replacing it with the term "waters of the United States." While these efforts may be well intended to ensure a clean water supply for our nation, I am concerned that this would have a devastating impact on rural towns, farmers, and local governments.

The term "navigable waters" has long been the term which limits federal intrusion with regards to the Clean Water Act's authority. Striking this term out of the law would result in a massive expansion of the federal government's authority by increasing the number of waters subject to water quality standards. If all intrastate waters are regulated, the language could be broadly interpreted to include everything within a state, including groundwater. As a result, the reach of federal jurisdiction would be so broad that it could significantly restrict landowners' ability to make decisions about their property and a state and local government's right to plan for its own development.

In 2011 the EPA issued controversial revised guidance regarding the definition of waters under its jurisdiction, and, like many Idahoans, I am deeply concerned about the ramifications of this effort. In recent years I have worked to include language in appropriations bills to prevent EPA from issuing regulations or guidance to expand their jurisdiction over state waters. As a member of the House Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, which oversees the budget for the EPA, I am monitoring this issue very closely.

Source