| Time to Vote for Clean Water |
| Hutchinson Leader [MN], Guest Editorial by From Sen. Gary Kubly District 20, DFL-Granite Falls and Rep. Aaron Peterson District 20A, DFL-Appleton (11/15/2007) |
| Minnesotans are all for clean water – and with good reason. Clean water for drinking, for health and hygiene, for agriculture, for industry, for the outdoor recreation on our lakes, rivers and wetlands that is so central to Minnesota life. Yet while we Minnesotans talk a good game on clean water, our actions fall short. More... |
| |
| Perfect time for restoration of Clean Water Act |
| Spooner Advocate [WI], Opinion by Babe Winkelman (11/14/2007) |
| October marked the 35th anniversary of the passage of the Clean Water Act, the most important piece of legislation ever passed to protect our nation’s waters from polluters and developers. Congress passed the 1972 Act to set a national standard for protecting all the nation’s waters. For more than three decades, the agencies charged with enforcing those safeguards have viewed our aquatic systems as a whole, realizing that intermittent streams and small wetlands are critically important, and on several ecological levels. More... |
| |
| Guest Opinion: Court rulings require water law clarification |
| Billings Gazette [MT], By Richard Parks (11/03/2007) |
| After decades of abuse of our nation's waters, dramatized by the Cuyahoga River catching fire in Ohio, a Republican president and a Democratic Congress met the challenge. The Clean Water Act passed by Congress in 1972 is a remarkable example of historic bipartisan efforts by the federal, state, and local governments to renew and refresh this country's water supplies. More... |
| |
| Cleaning up the water: Kudos to Rep. Davis |
| Anniston Star [AL], Editorial (10/31/2007) |
| To remedy the problem, Congress is preparing a bill called the Clean Water Restoration Act in an attempt to put the muscle back in the original Clean Water Act. The good news is that there is growing support in the House and Senate to move the provision forward. The bad news is that in Alabama, only Rep. Artur Davis, D-Birmingham, is supporting the measure. More... |
| |
| Are we about to backslide on public health? |
| Star Tribune [MN], By Representatives John Dingell and James Oberstar (10/21/2007) |
| Unfortunately, on the 35th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, it's a real risk. Before 1972, raw sewage and poisonous industrial waste were routinely dumped into our rivers and streams. Before 1972, urban rivers posed a fire hazard to their surrounding cities. Before 1972, the Great Lakes were dying. Before 1972, wetlands were being drained and filled without consideration of the repercussions. More... |
| |
| Restore the Clean Water Act |
| Bangor Daily News [ME], Op-Ed by Sharon S. Tisher (10/03/2007) |
| High discharges of phosphorus from a Millinocket mill this August caused a massive algae bloom that threatened aquatic life and drove swimmers, including me, from our favorite swimming holes along the Penobscot River watershed as far as 75 miles downstream in Hampden — a reminder of how fragile, and connected, our Maine waters are. More... |
| |
| Protect Our Waters |
| Providence Journal, Editorial (6/19/2007) |
| The best approach to taking the broad ecological impact of water pollution seriously is to enact the Clean Water Restoration Act, which clarifies definitions and makes regulatory mandates clear in dealing with the many challenges posed by industrial and residential pollution. Fresh water is a surprisingly rare resource in the world. We must do all that we can to protect it. More... |
| |
| Cleaning up the Clean Water Act |
| New York Times Editorial (5/27/2007) |
| A series of murky Supreme Court decisions have left the agencies responsible for enforcing the Clean Water Act in a state of confused paralysis, exposing millions of acres of wetlands and thousands of miles of streams to illegal and destructive development. Companion bills in the House and Senate would solve this problem by reaffirming the broad protections intended by Congress when it passed the law nearly 35 years ago. These bills deserve prompt passage.More... |
| |
| Clean water at risk |
| New York Times Editorial (6/20/2006) |
| Congress, though, should clear up any confusion by passing the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act. By doing so, it will reiterate that it wants extremely broad protection for the nation’s waterways, and that it, not the judiciary, should decide which ones are protected. More... |
| |
| Restore, Strengthen Clean Water Act |
| Seattle Post-Intelligencer, By Guest Columnist Eli Galla (2/23/2006) |
| Restoring all the protections of the Clean Water Act prior to when it was altered in 2003 would have a large impact on the quality of our water right now. The goal is always the same: to get our waterways as clean as possible, but the ways we do this need to be ever changing. More... |
| |
| Mother nature needs better protection |
| University of Minnesota Daily, September 17, 2004 |
| That makes you care about the health of our environment? Seeing loons and pristine waters in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area? Hunkering down in a duck blind at dawn as you wait to hear the calls of incoming waterfowl? Fishing in your favorite lake? Perhaps you're concerned about asthma in children, or mercury and particulates in the air we breathe? More... |
| |
| Bush Administration Policy Makes America s Waters |
| Joint Release from Earthjustice, NRDC, NWF, and Sierra Club, August 12, 2004 |
| Federal documents obtained by four environmental groups reveal that a Bush administration policy directive has eliminated federal Clean Water Act protections for streams, wetlands, lakes and rivers across the nation. In a report released today, the groups provide 15 case studies demonstrating how the administration s January 2003 policy directive has prompted federal regulators to avoid protecting ponds, lakes, rivers, and entire watersheds from toxic pollution. More... |
| |
| EPA Withdraws Proposal to Weaken Clean Water Act |
| Earthjustice 12/16/2003, December 16, 2003 |
| EPA Withdraws Proposal to Weaken Clean Water Act "A good first step," but more must be done to protect U.S. waters More... |
| |
| Rule Drafted That Would Dilute the Clean Water Act |
| LA Times 11/6/03, November 6, 2003 |
| WASHINGTON Bush administration officials have drafted a rule that would significantly narrow the scope of the Clean Water Act, stripping many wetlands and streams of federal pollution controls and making them available to being filled for commercial development. More... |
| |
| EPA Report Opposes Easing of Water Rules |
| Washington Post 9/5/03, September 5, 2003 |
| More than half the streams and one-third of all the wetlands in the mid-Atlantic region could lose federal Clean Water Act protection under a regulatory change being considered by the Bush administration, according to a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency analysis. More... |
| |
| Down Upon the Suwannee River |
| MotherJones 8/27/03, August 27, 2003 |
| It was only a small environmental rule change by Bush's EPA. But it's threatening Florida's Suwannee River -- and the nation's wetlands. More... |
| |
| EPA: Few Fined for Polluting Water |
| Washington Post 6/6/03, June 6, 2003 |
| About a quarter of the nation's largest industrial plants and water treatment facilities are in serious violation of pollution standards at any one time, yet only a fraction of them face formal enforcement actions, according to an Environmental Protection Agency internal study. More... |
| |
| Editorial: Protecting Waters, Large and Small |
| NY Times 3/3/03, March 3, 2003 |
| Editorial lauds effort of bipartisan group in Congress to reassert historical reach of Clean Water Act to protect all waters of United States; says two years ago ill-considered Supreme Court decision narrowed safeguards for certain isolated wetlands long covered by law, then in January Bush administration invited further reinterpretation of statute that could narrow its scope far more severely than court required; calls on Congress to clarify law so that it says in umistakable terms that small water bodies deserve same protection as large ones A bipartisan group in Congress has now moved to reassert the historical reach of the Clean Water Act to protect all the waters of the United States -- not just those chosen for protection by the Supreme Court, the Bush administration or the Army Corps of Engineers. More... |
| |
| Administration Outlines New Approach for Regulating Wetlands, Other Water Bodies |
| San Diego Union Tribune 1/11/03, January 11, 2003 |
| WASHINGTON The Bush administration issued guidelines that could result in the loss of federal protection for up to 20 million acres of swamps and bogs, a move officials said is necessary to comply with a Supreme Court ruling two years ago. More... |
| |
