The New York Times continues its excellent "Toxic Waters" series today, with a disturbing revelation: Rulings in recent years by the Supreme Court have left the nation's courts with an increasingly vague definition of which waterways the Clean Water Act applies to.
The Clean Water Act was intended to end dangerous water pollution by regulating every major polluter. But today, regulators may be unable to prosecute as many as half of the nation’s largest known polluters because officials lack jurisdiction or because proving jurisdiction would be overwhelmingly difficult or time consuming, according to midlevel officials.
An act of Congress could restore the original scope of the Clean Water Act, but resistance to such an action is already mobilizing, fueled by fears that Congress will regulate "rain puddles."
“The game plan is to emphasize the scary possibilities,” said one member of the Waters Advocacy Coalition, which has fought the legislation and is supported by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Association of Home Builders and other groups representing industries affected by the Clean Water Act.
“If you can get Glenn Beck to say that government storm troopers are going to invade your property, farmers in the Midwest will light up their congressmen’s switchboards,” said the coalition member, who asked not to be identified because he thought his descriptions would anger other coalition participants.
