As my colleague has said, his amendment makes technical changes to the legislation, but it leaves in question and very much in doubt--although it says the 40-year rule in Western water is standard--but is this in perpetuity? I would like a response on that, if I may involve myself in a colloquy with my colleague, Mr. Chairman. The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman may proceed.
Share
More from Grace Napolitano
We should recognize the familiarity and workability of the historic Clean Water Act and get on with the preservation of the health of our economy as well as that of our communities.
Since 1973, American Rivers has protected wild rivers, restored damaged rivers, and conserved clean water for people and nature.
I believe the Supreme Court purposely chose to substitute its own philosophy over decades-old, legally grounded efforts to protect water quality.
In my view, we get lost on questions of who is best suited to protect our water resources, rather than talking about the importance of rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands for current and future needs.
Other voices in this conversation
