We care more about our clean water and clean environment than any bureaucrat from Washington, DC. and the EPA.

I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of S. 1140, The Federal Water Quality Protection Act.

I do think key elements of S. 1140 actually address the downstream issue.

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of S.

I think it is a legitimate answer, myself.

Will you answer the question I posed? We do not have a lot of time here.

We certainly all want clean water. As I mentioned, my State probably has the cleanest water of anyplace in the world.

Three-fifths of the States oppose the proposed WOTUS rule along with more than 300 trade groups and associations from across the Country.

Does the EPA have the authority as a regulatory agency to unilaterally expand the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act or is that only the realm and the authority of Congress?

This is a bipartisan bill. I think a lot of members on both sides of the aisle recognize that there are some serious issues with this.

This massive expansion of Federal authority will have harsh consequences for not only those who are trying to develop the land but State and local governments charged with protecting their own unique resources.

One of the issues I think has been controversial about the WOTUS rule is the legal basis of the rule.

How do you respond to that? And this is on the eve of the rule. How do you respond to that?

They were at the end of a long process by which several agencies, and again, let's face it, it is the EPA, and the Corps is the key agency here, the key agency.

I ask unanimous consent to enter into a colloquy with the Senator from Tennessee. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Committee Examination of Issues in Their Jurisdiction

No agency, Republican or Democrat, has ever said they are going to manage the 1002 area for wilderness with the exception of yours. First time ever.

Then how can the President of the United States say he is going to manage the 1002 area for wilderness? He can't.

I think that your agency has been violating the law.

The President said he was going to manage the 1002 area for wilderness. He doesn't have the authority to do that.

I think you are violating the law, I think the President is violating the law.

I think it is just making the VA a better agency, more effective.

I can say with great confidence that if the EPA does in fact move forward with the uniform FIP, the EPA will be challenged in court by Oklahoma and other like-minded States.

To me, that would be one of the most important elements of the IG job, bringing back the issue of accountability.

Thank you for being willing to go through the confirmation process, willing to serve.

Such a move by the EPA would be the proverbial gun to the head of the States, demanding the States to act as the EPA sees fit or face punitive financial situations for their States.