Resolved: The United States Federal Government should pass Bill H.R. 4304

Okay, I do appologize for my forfeiture last round as there was something outside of my control I had to deal with. If need be I will forfeit my Conduct point to continue this debate.For this first piece of evidence I would like to bring up the Sold Waste Agency of Northern California V. Army Corps of Engineers. Here we can see that the EPA ruled this out as the area that the SWANC attempted to fill was already a gravel pit! This is attrouous as we can see that the EPA called this area out due to the Migratory birds was in fact part of a "bird Nexus" meaning that the birds stopped their on their way to waterways in their migratory south. [1] We can see that this is a huge abuse of power on behalf of the federal agency as there's no probably way of finding out that these birds stop here on the way to their "waterways" and if that's the case then there are hundreds of thousands of key areas of which are under this juristiction. The EPA has recently, in 2015, broadend their defintion of these waterways to, "‘waters of the United States’ so broadly that it covers virtually any wet spot – or occasionally wet spot – in the country, including ditches, drains, seasonal puddle-like depressions, intermittent streams, ponds, impoundments, prairie potholes, and large ‘buffer areas’ of land adjacent to every waterway.” [2] Due to this we can see how rediculoius this is as these areas are not even close to being that of navigatable and this is just simply attroucous as these waters might not even run off into rivers, lakes, nor the Ocean.Mr. Gaizano, head of the Senate Committee of the Envirnment stated on the rulings that, "it is not just costly and destructive for farmers, ranchers, and rural residents,” but also that “urban and suburban citizens and their local governments will be subject to increasing federal micromanagement and costly mandates.” [3] Here we can see that even the head of the Committe in the Senate is showing how terrible it is that our own executive branch is growing and abusing power to that of harming our own economy from not just big business, but the common man is being hurt to. We need to see that these waters need to be in fact navagatable in order for us to violate this act. We also need to look to the bill to see that Rivers are include as part of the inclusion in the bill. So the LA River would be protected whether or not it is or isn't navagatble.If we look at the Raspanos case we can see the governments hypocracy as, on the same plot of land that he got the okay from to build houses did Raspanos plan to build a third house. This third house was between two already pre-built houses and he had already gotten the okay from the EPA and local agencies to build. He began and the EPA went against him even though he'd gotten their okay. [4] This is another key example of federal abuse as when one gets the okay from the organization we need to see that they give permission to come onto that said person's land AND that they shouldn't go back on their promise. Oh, by the way, did I tell you he was 20 miles from the nearest waterway? This case was a simple repeat of the SWANC case as the Courts nor the government could reform the EPA to meet it new needs. For the above arguments we can see that my opponent's arguments are negated and that we need to pass the Defense of Envirnment and Property Act.Thank you and please vote Pro!Sources1. (https://www.law.cornell.edu...)2. (http://www.wsj.com...) 3. (https://www.pacificlegal.org...)4. (https://www.law.cornell.edu...)