For more than half a century, the Clean Water Act has worked to improve the quality of our nation's waterways.

the vertical integration is not helping the patient at all.

The Supreme Court's ruling in Sackett v. EPA last year provided a decisive win for America's farmers, small businesses, and property owners.

the savings are not going to the patients.

When we do that, we each represent 850,000 people, that is what the executive branch is supposed to do, not run their own agenda.

there is no greater example of bureaucratic overreach than the nightmare of complying with and understanding the definition of a water of the United States.

They don't know if they are breaking the law. They don't know if they are going to be able to feed their families.

The CWA is a potent weapon.

The Clean Water Act was never envisioned for the Federal Government to have control over every ditch and mud puddle.

This is broken.

I am going to advocate incredibly strongly for my farmers and yours to make sure that they can feed the world.

the Clean Water Act has worked to improve the quality of our Nation's waterways.

My first hearing on the waters of the U.S. was back in, I think, 1824.

Novo Nordisk cannot conduct onsite avoidance and minimization analysis before they know what parcel of property must be avoided.

Thank you, Chairman Rouzer and Ranking Member Napolitano, for convening this important hearing.

As is sometimes said, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Today's hearing raises important questions about the work the Federal Government must do to protect and advance the health of our Nation's seniors and nursing home residents.

I think they'd be proud of the right to vote. I think they would be absolutely committed to the idea that folks who haven't gone through the same process that they've done and accomplished the same outcome should not be voting.