William Tauzin: “Property owners are being described derogatorily tonight in this amendment debate as developers. Mr. Bowles in Texas was…”

“Property owners are being described derogatorily tonight in this amendment debate as developers. Mr. Bowles in Texas was not a developer. All he wanted to do was build his house, and that was the filling of the wetland that was denied jim, just to build his house next to his neighbors. That was the so-called filling of wetlands that became a deniable permit application that caused Mr. Bowles to spend 10 years in court. He loses under this amendment. He never gets compensated. Let me tell Members what the court said on that subject matter, again in Florida Rock. This is the Court of Claims: It is impossible to use one's property in a society without having some impact positive or adverse on others. Courts do not view the public's interest in environmental and aesthetic values as a servitude upon all private property but as a public benefit that is widely shared and therefore must be paid for by all. The court cited a list of other laws passed by this Congress in years past, environmental laws where Congress specified some sort of compensation.”