Environmental groups, which have vowed to bring legal challenges against the rule, fear the changes would protect fewer small waterways and could result in more pollution into drinking water, harm people's health and have economic effects.
CNN News, delivered. Select from our newsletters below and enter your email to subscribe.Washington (CNN)The Trump administration appears poised to finalize its replacement to stream and wetland regulations, and is expected to roll back a large body of federal protections. The Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers, which jointly regulate so-called waters of the US, have scheduled a late-morning news conference for Thursday. The New York Times reported late Wednesday the announcement would be this long-awaited rollback. In September, the EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler announced the repeal of the Obama-era Waters of the United States rule, or WOTUS, calling it an"egregious power grab." The repeal became effective in December. The 2015 regulation had defined which bodies of water are protected under the federal Clean Water Act. Environmental groups, which have vowed to bring legal challenges against the rule, fear the changes would protect fewer small waterways and could result in more pollution into drinking water, harm people's health and have economic effects.Read MoreThe EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers proposed its replacement rule in February to revise the definition of"waters of the United States" to exclude protections for wetlands, rivers and streams, including during heavy rain, that don't flow to"navigable waters."Also excluded from protection are artificially irrigated areas, roadside and farm ditches, and farm and stock ponds. Large rivers, streams, certain lakes and ponds, and wetlands along coastlines or that flow into larger bodies of water will remain protected. The Times reported that the replacement rule will be implemented in the next few weeks.In a public comment, the Southern Environmental Law Center called it the"biggest rollback in clean water protections in the 47 years" since the Clean Water Act was enacted. They argue that it would allow industrial facilities to dump chemicals and waste into streams without regulation. Members of the EPA's own Scientific Advisory Board raised concerns last month about several of the Trump administration's environmental priorities, including on clean water regulations.In draft responses to several EPA policies posted online, board members said the Trump administration's overhaul of water regulations"decreases protection for our Nation's waters and does not support the objective of restoring and maintaining 'the chemical, physical and biological integrity' of these waters."The Trump's rollback of WOTUS was a win for National Association of Manufacturers, a trade group which lobbied against the Obama rule and its legal arm previously sued to block it.Shortly after taking office, Trump signed an executive order that directed the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers to review WOTUS and propose a new rule either rescinding or revising the 2015 regulation. Trump slammed WOTUS as the"one of the most ridiculous regulations of all" Sunday night at the American Farm Bureau Federation's annual conference, suggesting that the rule had"basically took your property away from you" and allowed bureaucrats to"micromanage America's farmers."CNN's Rene Marsh contributed to this report. Read more: CNN
He doesn’t care about our waterway integrity, because he lacks same 🙄. no person should be taken advantage of by ANY law you dimwits. They’re destroying our country and people aren’t paying attention bc we have a fool as potus who cares about profit over ppl Why do republicans hate clean air and clean water so much?
Why the New York Times Is Getting Into the Documentary Films Business (EXCLUSIVE)Lance Oppenheim didn’t set out to make an 83-minute documentary when he started chronicling a group of senior citizens living in a retirement community in central Florida. But after 18 months and h… So they can be in the news more instead of just reporting the news overpriced rag
Contrarian ‘New York Times’ Travel Section Breaks With Paper To Endorse Deval Patrick For Democratic NominationNEW YORK—In a dramatic challenge of the editorial board, The New York Times travel section broke with the paper Tuesday to endorse former Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick for the Democratic nomination. “Given his impressive track record as a card-carrying Hyatt Loyalty Program member and the only candidate with TSA PreCheck, we are left no choice but to split with the main body of this organization and endorse Deval Patrick,” said travel editor Amy Virshup, explaining that the section’s values have been diverging from the rest of the newspaper for years and that The Time’s co-endorsement of Klobuchar and Warren did not reflect the values of American jet-setters nearly as well as Patrick. “Patrick thoroughly impressed us with his comprehensive plan for the best way to spend 48 hours in Marrakech, and proved he’s ready to lead with his extensive knowledge of everything from using concierge services to where to find the best bar in the Seattle area. Whether you prefer a family vacation or a romantic getaway, for the conscientious traveler, there is no better candidate than Deval Patrick.” At press time, an emergent Deval Patrick had picked up endorsements from every major American newspaper’s travel section. DEVAL FOR ALL Out on the town having the rally of my life with a bunch of supporters. They're all just out of frame, cheering too Obituaries section sticking with Sanders.
The New York Times' utterly confusing 2020 endorsementAt its most basic level, the 2020 Democratic primary process is about which one candidate distinguishes herself (or himself) as the person voters most trust to take on and beat President Donald Trump in November.
The New York Times Editorial Board Unconventionally Endorsed Both Elizabeth Warren and Amy KlobucharThe New York Times Editorial Board Endorsed Both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar hmmm
The New York Times Editorial Board Unconventionally Endorsed Both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar'May the best woman win,' the board writes. 🙄 Shitheads endorsing Shitheads! Seems right to me.😊
The New York Times Editorial Board Unconventionally Endorsed Both Elizabeth Warren and Amy KlobucharThe New York Times Editorial Board Endorsed Both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar