[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 18, 2023)] [House] [Pages H1782-H1788] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Date: 2023-04-18
Chamber: HOUSE
Mr. ROUZER: I rise in support of the override of President Biden's veto of this resolution, which I was proud to introduce alongside and with Chairman Sam Graves. Of course, this repeals the EPA's new waters of the U.S. rule. Mr. Speaker, I certainly recognize that this administration has never seen an onerous rule it didn't like, but the President's veto of this resolution reversing one of the Federal Government's most egregious rules to date really takes the cake. This resolution passed in both Chambers with a bipartisan vote, yet the President and his administration refuse to even consider the devastation this new WOTUS rule, if ultimately left intact by the courts, will cause. This new rule, with all its ambiguity, and therefore subjectivity, was issued mere months before the Supreme Court is anticipated to decide in Sackett v. EPA, a decision all but guaranteed to update the definition of the WOTUS once again, making this mud puddle of complexity even muddier. While this is clear to many Members on both sides of the aisle here in Congress, this administration continues to bow down to the demands of radical environmentalists while ignoring the commonsense calls to revoke this misguided rule. Unfortunately, the inconsistencies so many of us have said would result from this rule has already begun. Last week, a U.S. district court judge issued a preliminary injunction on the rule after 24 attorneys general filed suit. However, this only applies in those 24 States, as well as Texas and Idaho following action within their own courts. This means half of the country is currently subject to the rule and the other half is not. I am disappointed North Carolina's attorney general did not join that effort. In North Carolina's Seventh Congressional District that I have the honor to represent, storms can bring very heavy rains, and with creeks, streams, and rivers everywhere throughout the landscape, water lingering for short periods of time could easily be classified as a WOTUS, depending on the viewpoint of the bureaucrat making the judgment. Heavy fines, litigation, and even prosecution can and does result. Further, the overregulation and broad scope of interpretations of this rule have grave implications for cattle, poultry, and hog farmers in North Carolina. These farmers are often victims of environmentalists and trial lawyers looking for a gotcha moment in their quest to upend the efficiency and sustainability of our food system. This WOTUS rule puts a target on their backs, and it is why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that also represent strong agricultural communities supported this resolution. Mr. Speaker, this vote today is an opportunity for our legislative body to exercise one of its most basic but fundamental responsibilities, to serve as a check on the executive branch when it goes against the will and interests of the American people. Mr. Speaker, this WOTUS rule clearly does that. I urge my colleagues to support this override of the President's veto.