{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://newhouse.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/newhouse-leads-201-members-calling-biden-administration-drop-wotus", "Newhouse Leads 201 Members in Calling on the Biden Administration to Drop WOTUS Expansion", "2022-03-14", "2022", "2022-03", "Republican", "House", "WA", "Dan Newhouse", "N000189", "newhouse.house.gov", "newhouse", "https://newhouse.house.gov/media-center/press-releases", "scraper", "WASHINGTON, D.C. \u2013 Today, Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-WA), Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus, released the following statement after leading 201 House Republicans, including House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-NY), and their entire Western Caucus membership, in sending a letter to the Biden Administration calling on them to drop their plan to expand the scope of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d (WOTUS):\n\n\u201cThe Obama-era Waters of the United States\u2014or WOTUS\u2014is the single most overreaching federal regulation in history. This dangerous policy empowers federal bureaucrats to place every single body of water\u2014every ditch, puddle, and stream\u2014under federal regulation,\u201d said Rep. Newhouse. \u201cWOTUS is more than just a logistical nightmare that\u2019s plagued the landowners, businesses, farmers, ranchers, and rural communities in Central Washington and across the country for years. It calls into question whether farmers can even begin to work their land. I am proud to lead this effort, so Central Washington and rural communities like it across the country can escape this government overreach and do what they do best: thrive.\u201d\n\nBeyond opposition to the unnecessary burdens a broader WOTUS definition would have on businesses, communities, and private citizens, the letter outlines the uncertainty that would be created if such a decision were made before the recently announced WOTUS-related Supreme Court case (Sackett) is decided. The members wrote, \u201cnot only would this be a misuse of agency resources and taxpayer dollars, it would only serve to leave the regulated community with prolonged uncertainty regarding regulations and enforcement.\u201d\n\nThe Members detailed their firm opposition to the current WOTUS rulemaking:\n\nA Supreme Court ruling on WOTUS later this year will have significant impacts on any rule the Agencies put forward. A premature rulemaking will compound existing uncertainty and confusion for stakeholders, who have already experienced years of uncertainty over WOTUS definition and scope changes.\n\nThe Agencies have stated their rulemaking will take into account \u201cupdates to be consistent with relevant Supreme Court decisions.\u201d With such a significant decision pending, refusing to push pause on their current rewrite rather than wait for the Supreme Court\u2019s action could lead to another complete rewrite just months down the line, wasting taxpayer resources.\n\nA broader WOTUS rule will delay, obstruct, and drive up the costs of improving U.S. infrastructure, and ultimately diminish the value of funding for projects across the country, including those funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.\n\nDue to the WOTUS rulemaking\u2019s anticipated negative impact on small businesses, the U.S. Small Business Administration\u2019s Office of Advocacy has already requested the Agencies pause and a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel be held.\n\nYou can read the full letter here and below.\n\nDear Administrator Regan and Assistant Secretary Connor:\n\nWe write to you today regarding the United States Supreme Court\u2019s most recent announcement to grant certiorari to Michael Sackett, et ux., Petitioners v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al. (Sackett). For almost two decades, rural communities, businesses, and industries who rely on clean water have been trapped in political and legal limbo, surrounded by a shroud of legal opinions and faulty federal regulations. On June 9, 2021, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) (collectively, the \u201cAgencies\u201d) announced their intent to revise the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States,\u201d (WOTUS). Any decision by the Supreme Court on Sackett will have profound impacts on the Agencies\u2019 rulemaking process. Therefore, we urge the EPA and the Corps to halt its current rulemaking.\n\nThe United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has improperly held that federal jurisdiction for WOTUS should follow the \u201csignificant nexus\u201d test laid out in Justice Kennedy\u2019s concurring opinion in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), rather than a more narrow approach based on the areas the Kennedy opinion and the plurality opinion authored by Justice Scalia have in common. The Obama Administration\u2019s 2015 WOTUS rule also followed this flawed \u201csignificant nexus\u201d approach, resulting in an unprecedented expansion of the definition of WOTUS. This rule asserted federal jurisdiction over typically dry channels and a variety of intrastate non-navigable isolated waters. It is expected that a decision in Sackett would set forth a clearer and more appropriate test to define WOTUS and deliver certainty to the farmers, ranchers, private landowners, and industries who face the burden of this federal overreach.\n\nAny future rulemaking must be based on fully informed legal guidance. The Agencies\u2019 goal of developing a lasting rule can only be achieved if appropriate legal standards are met, and it is premature to develop a new rule until the Court\u2019s Sackett opinion is issued. The Agencies themselves have stated that their rulemaking will take into account \u201cupdates to be consistent with relevant Supreme Court decisions.\u201d We hope the Agencies\u2019 regulatory activities remain consistent with these statements. If the Agencies move ahead with their current rulemaking, and the Court instructs the use of a more limiting test like Justice Scalia\u2019s plurality opinion, the Agencies would be forced to implement a new rulemaking process once again post-Sackett. Unfortunately, not only would this be a misuse of agency resources and taxpayer dollars, it would only serve to leave the regulated community with prolonged uncertainty regarding regulations and enforcement.\n\nConfusion, unpredictability, and litigation have surrounded the scope of federal authority of our nation\u2019s navigable waterways for decades. Currently, the Administration\u2019s plan to revise the definition of WOTUS will be the sixth change in ten years; despite the Administration\u2019s statements that the new regulation would only be a return to the regulatory definition used before the 2015 WOTUS rule updated in conformance with judicial decisions. In reality, the rule takes a new and expansive approach to the definition of WOTUS, creating additional costs and burdens for regulated stakeholders.\n\nFurther, the Agencies certified that the new regulation would not have a significant effect on small businesses. However, the United States Small Business Administration\u2019s Office of Advocacy, meant to serve as an independent voice for small business, disagreed with this assessment, specifically finding that the \u201cAgencies have improperly certified the proposed rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) because it would likely have direct significant impacts on a substantial number of small entities.\u201d The Office of Advocacy asked that the Agencies hold the rule in abeyance while it conducts a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel, in accordance with the RFA.\n\nRural communities across the country are dedicated to clean water, and they do not deserve to be punished by constant regulatory uncertainty. Any further rulemaking prior to the Supreme Court\u2019s decision will jeopardize Americans\u2019 best interests and fail to ensure our communities will not be subject to further uncertainty and government overreach. A premature rulemaking will also hinder efforts in communities across the country to build out and improve our Nation\u2019s infrastructure, as the regulatory definition of WOTUS has a direct impact on agencies\u2019 ability to authorize and complete infrastructure projects in a timely and efficient manner. This is especially troubling timing as Congress recently approved billions of dollars in funding for critical infrastructure.\n\nWe urge the EPA and the Corps to halt all current rulemaking actions surrounding the WOTUS definition as the United States Supreme Court takes up this landmark case. The Agencies should instead use this time to continue meaningful engagement with stakeholders, including convening an SBAR panel. This would allow the Agencies to fully understand and account for the impacts to small businesses, farmers, rural communities, and countless other stakeholders that will result from any regulatory change to the definition of WOTUS. We look forward to working with you on this important issue. If you have questions, please contact Ryan Hambleton, Republican Staff Director of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, at (202) 225-9446.\n\nBackground:\n\nIn January, Rep. Newhouse called on the Biden Administration to terminate their proposed WOTUS rulemaking after the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would consider a case focused on the scope of the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States\u201d (WOTUS).\n\nRep. Newhouse recently hosted a podcast episode featuring Charles Yates of the Pacific Legal Foundation, one of the contributing lawyers in the Sackett v. EPA Supreme Court case, as well as Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) and Illinois Farm Bureau President Rich Guebert, to discuss the impacts WOTUS has on rural communities and potential implications of the Supreme Court decision. Click here to listen.\n\nIn July 2021, when the Biden Administration announced their intention to revise and remand the Trump Administration\u2019s Navigable Waters Protection Rule, Rep. Newhouse led Western Caucus Members in a bicameral letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan and Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Jaime Pinkham to express their serious concerns and demand answers about the Administration\u2019s plans to reopen the definition of \u201cwaters of the United States.\u201d Click here to read the letter and learn more.", 1, "2026-03-30T01:40:41Z", "2026-04-08T02:06:17Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://newhouse.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/newhouse-leads-201-members-calling-biden-administration-drop-wotus"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.7094030734151602, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}