On the recordJuly 9, 2013
I stand in opposition to the amendment offered by my friend from Virginia, and I want to start out by clarifying something that was said a minute ago, that this was done by clever Bush administration lawyers. In fact, it was a rule proposed by President Clinton. That would be Democrat President Clinton, a rule proposed by Democrat President Clinton. Now, there was a public comment period. It wasn't done in the dark of the night, but it was done with public comments, and the rule was changed in 2002, which is true that President Bush would have been the President during that time period. But it was an ongoing and a slow and deliberate process, and it was simply a commonsense need that was something that I think was pro-business, which I understand is offensive to some people. But it also streamlines the bureaucracy and helps the private sector create jobs. And all it simply did was get the Corps of Engineers and the EPA to have the same definition of fill. That's not a radical concept. That's common sense. And again, if we're going to compete in the world marketplace, we should have common sense, even with Washington bureaucrats. Now, the definition includes materials that, when placed into the waters of the U.S., have the effect of replacing or changing the bottom elevation of any portion of that water. Therefore, it includes rock, sand, soil, clay, plastics, construction debris, wood chips, and overburden from mining. These are regulated right now.…
