Dan Sullivan

As corny as it may sound--I was 5 years old when John Kennedy was inaugurated as President. I grew up with the 'ask what you can do for your country' tag line.

I think Congress sometimes comes in and has broader strategic insights than the military has on occasion, not always.

If we start withdrawing troops, the 425 in particular, I think that heightens risk.

We are not even playing in this game at all.

Some of us think that our credibility in certain areas of the world has been weak.

I do not think they abide by the law, but (B) they seem limitless.

As rapidly is the key issue. Again, it is a huge issue with our fleet. I think there are a lot of people who are starting to lose patience on it.

I do not believe it has been approved or authorized by the Congress.

I have seen this both as Alaska's attorney general and a DNR commissioner there.

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

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

I think it is a legitimate answer, myself.

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

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?

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

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

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.

I am proud to be an original cosponsor of S.

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

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

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.

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 think that your agency has been violating the law.

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