I think, also, to get to it, we have, as much as we might have a different approach to what we are trying to get here, one of the conforming themes, I think, that the Chairman and I have, and all of us have, is some kind of consistency.

It is the 51st anniversary of the Clean Water Act as we speak.

It is the 51st anniversary of the Clean Water Act as we speak.

I would say, to simplify there, what I am hearing is that we are going to be back at court, and this is going to be back up to the Supreme Court, the way the Administration has rewritten this rule.

Let me ask you this. I talked about the rulemaking process. They kind of skirted a little bit the rules there, in terms of public input, which is kind of ironic, because in this Committee, all we hear about is community input and how we need to make sure we are listening to communities, which I believe is extremely valuable, and we should be doing that.

I think, also, to get to it, we have, as much as we might have a different approach to what we are trying to get here, one of the conforming themes, I think, that the Chairman and I have, and all of us have, is some kind of consistency.

Do you get any kind of sense since your testimony in July that any agencies have made any progress?

I just have one question that I can't resist asking.

Do you get any kind of sense since your testimony in July that any agencies have made any progress?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks, welcome to our witnesses. I want to thank you for calling this hearing.

I think for people who are listening, too, to realize that, and I think you confirmed the figures here, $2 billion is the cost to the taxpayer every year to operate the buildings, is that correct?