On September 25, a group of Member Scholars from the Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) submitted comments on the Trump administration's proposed rollback of the "waters of the United States" rule (technically, the rollback rule has been issued by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but its support within those agencies comes only from the Trump administration's political appointees). The proposed rule addresses the scope of federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act – which means, in non-legal terms, that it decides which waters get protected by federal law.
Two years ago, EPA and the Army Corps released the "Clean Water Rule," which clarified and very slightly increased the scope of these protections. The current proposal would throw the Clean Water Rule onto the scrap heap. The eventual goal, as the administration has made perfectly clear, is to reduce the reach of the Clean Water Act, particularly with respect to the smaller waterways that feed into our rivers, lakes, and oceans.
This, our comments explain, is both unlawful and unwise. It is unlawful because the current proposal makes a mockery of the basic requirements of administrative law. At a basic level, administrative law is designed to ensure that agency decisions are subject to public vetting, clearly and sensibly explained, and consistent with governing statutes. The Trump administration's current proposal meets none of those requirements. Instead, its authors have specifically stated that they are uninterested in comments on the rule they actually would put in place. Their explanations for their proposal make little sense. And they have made no effort to reconcile their proposal with the science of water quality protection or with the Clean Water Act's fundamental goals of ensuring that our nation's waters are clean.
The proposal is unwise because, while the Trump administration may not realize this, clean water matters. And we cannot have clean water without protecting tributary waterways. In preparing the 2015 rule that the administration wants to scrap, EPA reviewed well over 1,000 scientific studies, which collectively explained the many ways in which the Clean Water Rule's protections would help sustain water supplies, protect drinking water quality, support recreation, sustain habitat, and reduce flooding risks. To the Trump administration, those benefits may not count; the new proposal simply ignores them. But in the daily lives of millions of Americans, they are crucially important.
Showing 2,833 results
Dave Owen | September 26, 2017
On September 25, a group of Member Scholars from the Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) submitted comments on the Trump administration’s proposed rollback of the “waters of the United States” rule (technically, the rollback rule has been issued by EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but its support within those agencies comes only […]
Matt Shudtz | September 20, 2017
This op-ed originally ran in the Baltimore Sun. The full scope of the heartbreaking devastation wrought by hurricanes Harvey and Irma — the human, economic and environmental toll — may not be completely understood for years. As we do what we can to help the victims, it is also time to think about how we […]
Matt Shudtz | September 19, 2017
UPDATE: The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works has rescheduled the confirmation hearing originally slated for Wednesday, September 20. The committee now plans to hold the hearing on Wednesday, October 4. Three influential EPA offices – the Offices of Air, Water, and Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention – share a common attribute. Each is at […]
Katie Tracy | September 15, 2017
In the wake of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, thousands of Texans and Floridians are out of work, some indefinitely. Without knowing when their employers might reopen for business (if at all) , many are uncertain how they’re going to afford their next meal or purchase basic necessities, much less repair their damaged homes and property. […]
David Flores | September 9, 2017
As Hurricane Irma takes aim at the Florida coast, questions about property and community vulnerabilities abound, including for some of President Donald Trump’s properties. A brief analysis by the Center for Progressive Reform (CPR) has found that while Trump’s properties, including Mar-a-Lago, face significant risk of damage from the hurricane and from the ongoing impacts […]
Evan Isaacson | September 5, 2017
Last month, Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke submitted his long-anticipated report to President Trump that recommends dismantling and looting some of America's treasured monuments and antiquities. (This was interesting timing, given that the president stood firmly behind the preservation of some other, far less-cherished monuments.) In anticipation of the report, Theodore Roosevelt IV, the 26th […]
David Flores | August 30, 2017
As the country bears witness to the impacts of Hurricane Harvey, a storm unlike any other, the Trump administration’s policy of rolling back worker, emergency response, and environmental safeguards will all but ensure that victims of future flooding events will be exposed to toxic contamination. Over just a 36-hour period, an estimated 9 trillion gallons of rainwater deluged […]
Alice Kaswan | August 28, 2017
With a sense of horror, the nation is watching waters rise in southeastern Texas as now-Tropical Storm Harvey spins across the Gulf Coast. While no individual storm can be attributed to climate change, scientists predict more intense storms, and the wisdom of preparing for future floods has never been clearer. And yet, less than two […]
Matt Shudtz | August 23, 2017
Last week, more than two dozen law professors from around the country – many of them CPR Member Scholars – filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the U.S. Supreme Court, urging a fresh look at a lower court decision with sweeping implications for the balance of power between states and the federal government. The issue is […]