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

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

We are just regular guys and gals. Welcome. Thanks for that testimony, especially for your close.

I think these concerns miss the point. We just had a radical, I think, a sweeping reduction in water protections.

I think it is a critically important piece.

I am going to be looking for consensus and implementing a lot of stuff that we have authored and enacted.

I think we have been locked in a bit of a cycle and not thinking as creatively as we can in the rulemaking process.

We have been remarkably successful, not entirely successful, remarkably successful on a wide range of issues.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court failed to recognize this link in May of this year when the conservative majority upended more than four decades of agency practice and precedent based on the original intent of the law.

We should think long and hard before eliminating protections for more than half of our wetlands.

I also disagree that Sackett means we have lost a lot of authority.