Ranking Members Larsen, Napolitano Statements from Roundtable to Examine Fallout from SCOTUS Sackett Decision

Hearing

"Thank you, Ranking Member Napolitano for convening this roundtable to discuss the impact of the Sackett v. EPA decision. While we await more exact impact analysis, the initial estimates predict a broad removal of protections for waterbodies nationwide.

Thank you for assembling such varied perspectives for today's panel. The Sackett decision will affect specific regions and communities differently, so it is fitting to bring in such a wide range of participants to speak to those impacts.

Relying upon estimates from EPA's Navigable Waters Protection Rule under the previous administration, which similarly negated the significant nexus test, this decision could threaten roughly 50% of wetlands, and 70% of rivers and streams that have been protected since the creation of the Clean Water Act (CWA).

The impacts of weakened CWA protections are not limited to permitting rules.

For example, we can expect increased flooding when formerly protected wetlands are filled in or polluted. Polluting upstream ephemeral or intermittent streams will likely lead to water body pollution downstream. Pollution can mean beach closures, harmful algal blooms, and habitat destruction to plants and animals that rely on those waters.

These kinds of harmful impacts will effectively reverse investments that we have been making for decades.

In the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, on a bipartisan basis, Congress affirmed its commitment to water infrastructure with $12.7 billion in federal dollars for upgrading wastewater systems and preventing pollution. That investment will be moot if these systems are bridled with additional, unregulated pollution.

Waterbodies do not recognize state lines, which is why Congress passed the original Clean Water Act--having 50 different sets of rules led to downstream pollution from upstream neighbors with different regulations.

In Washington State, this is a frequent concern. We need to rely on our bordering states' water protections, because much of our water flows originate there. Rivers with headwaters in Idaho come through my state, and are the same waters that tribes rely on for subsistence fishing or that farmers rely on for watering their crops and livestock.

House Democrats consistently support investments in water infrastructure and clean water protections to support public health, our environment, our communities and local economies. This decision, if not met with Congressional action, could reverse all those efforts.

I look forward to this discussion today. Thank you to the panelists for your participation in this important roundtable."

Source