Bill Shuster

Mr. SHUSTER

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my honor to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller), the chair of the House Administration Committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I urge the gentleman from Oregon to go back and read the second part of the bill--the last half of the bill. He may find a little different perspective on it. With that, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from West Virginia (Mrs. Capito).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, can I inquire as to how much time is remaining on each side?

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the Congressman from Florida (Mr. Southerland), who is the original sponsor of H.R. 5078, the Waters of the United States Regulatory Overreach Protection Act. I think it is a thoughtful piece of legislation.

Mr. SHUSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Barletta). (Mr. BARLETTA asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), former chairman of the Judiciary Committee and now a member of the Science and Technology Committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my honor to yield 1-1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gibbs), the chairman of the Water Resources Subcommittee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis).

Mr. SHUSTER. It is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Jolly).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lucas), the chairman of the Agriculture Committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5078.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I will conclude and yield myself the balance of my time, first, by thanking Mr. Rahall for working with us to come forward with a commonsense approach to stopping another grab by the executive branch. I also want to thank Congressman Steve Southerland from Florida, who introduced H.R. 5078. Mr. Southerland has been a leader on the water issue since he arrived in Congress. As we have been talking about here, and as Mr. Rahall agrees, this proposed rule would significantly increase the geographic scope of the Federal Government's authority under the act and is outside the bounds of what can legitimately be done by the rulemaking. It also is going to create great uncertainty within the many industries in this country. The rulemaking proposed by the administration is yet another example of the disturbing pattern as this Presidency seeks to use brute force to expand executive action while ignoring Congress and the Supreme Court. I would urge all the Members, all 435 Members of this body, to look seriously at this piece of legislation and what this administration is trying to do. The President tries to grab Congress' legitimate constitutional authority. And if you have any doubts on that, the Supreme Court, twice, rejected a rulemaking by the EPA. I think all 435 of us ought to be looking closely, whether it is a Republican or a Democrat administration, at these power grabs by the executive branch. It has gone on for far too long, and Congress needs to stand up and maintain its constitutional authority. This is a massive Federal jurisdiction grab. In the 110th and the 111th Congresses, there were attempts through various committees and through various amendments which were rejected on a bipartisan basis to stop this. H.R. 5078, introduced by our colleague, Mr. Southerland, simply prevents the EPA and the Corps from finalizing the ill-conceived proposed rule, and directs the agencies to consult with the States and local officials. That is the way forward, going back to our States and our local governments. They care as much or more about the waters in Pennsylvania and West Virginia and California and Oregon than the EPA does. This notion in Washington that Washington has the greater concern, that Washington has the better idea, the one-size-fits-all, just doesn't work, and it has been proven time and time again. So again, this stops the administration proceeding. It has a path forward. I would urge my colleagues to read all nine pages of this bill. If you get to the end, you will see there is a way forward, and that is to consult with the States and the locals to come up with a consensus rule that can result in reasonable regulatory process that protects our waters. So, with that, Mr. Chairman, I support this legislation. I urge all Members to vote in favor of H.R. 5078, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Collins).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from California (Mr. McCarthy), the Republican leader.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Terry).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, it is now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho).

Mr. SHUSTER

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I must strongly oppose this motion to recommit because it basically aims to gut the underlying bill. The purpose of H.R. 5078 is to uphold the Federal-State partnership in regulating the Nation's waters by maintaining a balance between the States and the Federal Government in carrying out the Clean Water Act. H.R. 5078 restricts the administration's current administrative efforts to expand Federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, and requires the agencies to engage in a federalism consultation with the State and local government partners in implementing the Clean Water Act. However, this motion is designed to undermine the legislation by giving the EPA unfettered discretion in making State water quality determinations in order to allow the administration to continue implementing its flawed rule. In effect, the amendment says that the underlying bill will not apply virtually anywhere the EPA decides that the bill should not apply. This amendment would further erode the Federal and State partnership that H.R. 5078 seeks to preserve. I would urge all 435 Members of this body to take notice. This is another attempt by the executive branch to take Congress' constitutional authority away from us. We should all take this as a serious challenge to us. For too long, this body has allowed the executive branch to take our authority granted to us by the Constitution. I say whether it is a Republican or a Democrat administration, we have to stop that. This bill, H.R. 5078, is a step in the right direction. H.R. 5078 is a good bill that maintains the balance of our Nation's water. We must preserve the State and Federal partnership that has existed under the Clean Water Act until this administration chose to impose an overbearing EPA on our States. I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. SHUSTER

Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure be authorized to file a supplemental report on the bill, H.R. 5078.

Mr. SHUSTER

Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Speaker, it is now my pleasure to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Madam Speaker, we have no further speakers, and I continue to reserve the balance of my time.