Sherwood Boehlert: “my colleagues, the debate we begin today on the Clean Water Act is quite simply the test of whether the center can hold.…”

“my colleagues, the debate we begin today on the Clean Water Act is quite simply the test of whether the center can hold. We are faced on the one hand by the clean water statute that, despite its many strengths, has clear flaws that must be remedied. We are confronted, on the other hand, with a proposal that instead of simply repairing those flaws, rolls back existing protections, imperiling our rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. Clearly, neither the status quo nor the proposed rewrite of the Clean Water Act are acceptable alternatives. What is needed is an approach that preserves our water resources without causing undue economic hardship. The gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer], and I will offer a substitute later today that offers just such an approach. What we have done is to take the best proposals being offered around town and combine them into one bill. Our litmus test has not been ideology, but practical input, which proposal was the most likely to reasonably protect our Nation's waters. For example, we have adopted the National Governors' Association proposal for wetlands protection, a solid middle ground position. H.R. 961, on the other hand, would allow the wholesale destruction of more than half the Nation's wetlands. That is not my opinion, that is what we learned from the scientists.”