Thomas R. Carper

the Sackett decision, in my view, has jeopardized nearly a half-century of progress under this bedrock environmental law.

As a matter of impacts, we have heard that the loss of protections for over half of our Nation's remaining wetlands and millions of miles of streams will lead to more flooding, more polluted waters, and unfortunately, harm to wildlife.

As a matter of history, we have heard that this decision reverses over four decades of clean water implementation.

Thanks to champions like Senator Ed Muskie, a Democrat from Maine, and Senator Howard Baker, a Republican from Tennessee, Congress enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972.

I had a great run in the Navy and as Delaware's treasurer, Congressman, Governor, Senator, and to serve here and chair this Committee.

Removing protection for wetlands is especially shortsighted as climate change continues to fuel more extreme weather events.

I think it is a moral issue, and it is something that we have a moral imperative to make sure we get it right.

The Clean Water Act has lofty goals, and then it has some nonregulatory programs, and some regulatory programs.

Before the Clean Water Act, our Nation's waters were subject to indiscriminate pollution and destruction.

Cooperative federalism enshrined in statute, when correctly applied, will protect our environment and our economy.

One of the things that Senator Capito and I try to do is develop consensus on difficult issues.

The Supreme Court correctly applied the Clean Water Act in the Sackett case.