[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 137 (Monday, September 12, 2016)]
[House]
[Page H5257]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    EPA'S REGULATIONS NEGATIVELY AFFECT JOBS AND THE RURAL COMMUNITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Conaway) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, farmers, ranchers, and foresters take great 
pride in the stewardship of the land. They are the original 
conservationists. While it may be popular among some to blame farmers 
and ranchers for any and every environmental concern that crops up, I 
know that nobody cares more for the environment than those who work the 
land every day. When a farm family's livelihood depends on caring for 
natural resources, there is an undeniable economic incentive to adopt 
practices to enhance the land's long-term viability.
  Unfortunately, the Obama administration has pursued an agenda 
seemingly absent of any recognition of the consequences for rural 
America and production agriculture. Obama's EPA is creating regulations 
that are burdensome, overreaching, and negatively affecting jobs and 
the rural economy.
  Perhaps the most poignant example is the EPA and Army Corps of 
Engineers' recent power grab with the waters of the U.S. rule or, as 
the EPA calls it, the clean water rule. I will be frank, this rule is 
not about clean water. Everybody wants and deserves clean water. This 
rule simply embodies EPA's insatiable appetite for power. When EPA 
Administrator Gina McCarthy testified before the House Committee on 
Agriculture in February, members of the committee brought forth many 
concerns with the WOTUS rule. Numerous times Administrator McCarthy 
simply brushed off their concerns with statements that were intended to 
assure us that farmers would have the same longstanding farming 
exemptions that were originally included in the Clean Water Act.
  These verbal assurances give little comfort to farmers and ranchers 
who will face steep civil fines for any violation. While the 
Administrator was telling the farming community that they have nothing 
to fear with the new WOTUS rule, a California farmer was being 
prosecuted by the Justice Department for simply plowing his field.
  The lawsuit brought against this producer claims that by plowing a 
field, which every farmer I know considers a normal farming practice, 
this farmer has created, get this, ``mini mountain ranges'' in his 
field. These mountain ranges are furrows from normal farming. The suit 
also claims that this producer discharged a pollutant into the waters 
of the U.S. This so-called pollutant was the soil he was plowing. These 
perceived violations only came to light when an overzealous court 
bureaucrat just happened to be driving by the property and discovered 
perceived WOTUS violations on the land.
  Regardless of the degree to which some deem government regulation 
justifiable, all regulations must be developed in a manner that is 
based on science and mindful of the economic consequences. This rule 
clearly was not. Farmers, ranchers, and foresters believe the EPA is 
attacking them, and it is easy to understand why.
  Instead of using the EPA and Corps' preferred strategy of fear and 
intimidation, coupled with punitive enforcement and overreaching 
regulatory authority, we should be building on the successful approach 
taken in the 2014 farm bill and previous farm bills to protect our 
natural resources through voluntary incentive-based conservation 
programs.

                          ____________________