A version of this post was originally featured on SurveyMonkey’s blog site, and includes additional information on new survey results affirming the public’s overwhelming support for clean water.

Once Upon a Time: When Rivers Caught Fire

Not too long ago, things were pretty bad for our water. Unchecked industrial discharges and poorly-treated sewage in our water meant that massive fish-kills were commonplace. Lakes were “dead” or dying, and rivers containing more waste than water actually caught fire. It was around that time, in the 1970s, when Clean Water Action and Clean Water Fund got their start. The organizations’ missions were – and remain – focused on a goal and vision of fishable, swimmable, drinkable water for all Americans.

Fast-forward four decades. Laws such as the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, created and passed with help from Clean Water Action and others, have brought incredible progress on water cleanup, water restoration and water protection. Everyone has benefited. Our clean water progress is one of the great environmental success stories of our time.

Back to the Future – Water in Trouble

But now things are getting pretty bad for our water, again. Here’s what’s going on:

• New Threats to Our Water – New pollution threats or old ones not yet addressed by laws like the Clean Water Act have started to gain ground. New chemicals enter the marketplace and our water at a far faster pace than the laws can keep up with.
• Old Problems Getting Worse – Pollution that enters the water from our air or runs off the land has yet to be effectively controlled, and its impact has grown to the point where it is now a leading cause of contamination in many waterways.
• Too Much Deferred Maintenance – Pipes and treatment plants that supply our clean water and to treat our wastes are getting old and outdated. They are starting to fail.

Thanks to Clean Water organizations like ours these problems are well understood, along with many of the steps needed to start fixing them so that continued progress can be made.

Polluters Gaining the Upper Hand?

Our water now faces another kind of threat, as well. In Congress and in too many of our state capitals, alarming numbers of politicians have declared war on our water. A majority in the U.S. House is now on record in favor of Dirty Water, with votes for H.R. 2018, a bill that would cripple the Clean Water Act. That vote was only one among 191 which passed the House in 2011 – an average of one dirty water or anti-environmental, anti-health vote for each day the House was in session.

How to respond? We need to make sure that the voices of people who care about our water are being heard. We need to make sure that officials who have taken on an extreme agenda that benefits a small number of the nation’s largest polluters – at everyone else’s expense – are held accountable for their votes to weaken water and health protections

Clean Water Action and Clean Water Fund bring people together to advance our shared values, building a clean water future for everyone. We educate, involve and organize people one-on-one where they live, work and play, to take a more active role in decisions that affect our water and our health. We show people how they can make a difference for our water, individually through actions in their own homes and daily lives – and collectively, by joining with others to make the majority’s support for clean water more of a force to be reckoned with.

Take Action for Clean Water here.

Read the full original SurveyMonkey blog on Clean Water here for more on what the public thinks about these issues and a new way to support Clean Water through the SurveyMonkey Contribute program.

Related posts

1. Toward a Clean Energy Future that Protects Our Water
2. What’s the Big Idea? Support our strategy for a Clean Water Future

Maintain Our Clean Water Progress - Take Action Today

From our friends at National Wildlife Federation

By Jan Goldman-Carter

Our nation’s investment in clean water began forty years ago with the 1972 Clean Water Act – a bi-partisan congressional commitment to end the flagrant pollution of rivers, lakes and coastal waters. Republicans and Democrats alike recognized that to clean up our rivers, lakes, and bays, we had to stop pollution at its source – upstream in the multitude of headwaters, wetlands, and small streams that store and filter water before releasing it downstream. Since its birth, the Clean Water Act has guided the clean up of America’s waters, rendering many of our waters once again safe for fishing, drinking and swimming.

Clean Water Act Faces Challenges

Murky Supreme Court decisions in SWANCC (2001) and RAPANOS (2006) and conflicting agency guidance are eroding the Clean Water Act and putting millions of acres of wetlands and streams at risk for contamination and destruction. Tributaries and wetlands that provide clean water to iconic systems like the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes and the Mississippi River Basin and Delta are at risk. These at risk waters supply at least some of the drinking water for 117 million Americans. These water bodies provide important fish and wildlife habitats that fuel local economies and support outdoor traditions across the country. As these resources are polluted and diminished, so are the tremendous natural and public health benefits they provide, including food, drinking water and flood protection.

As the Clean Water Act turns 40 this year, America needs to renew its commitment to clean water and a strong Clean Water Act so that we do not slide back into that time almost four decades ago when you could light a river on fire because of the pollution. Our waterways and wetlands should not be the dumping grounds for factory farm animal sewage, toxic mining waste and other health-threatening contaminants.

We cannot protect our drinking water or restore the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, or Florida’s clear springs and bays unless we commit to strengthen, not weaken, the Clean Water Act. It is time for the Administration to move forward and sustain that legacy by restoring longstanding Clean Water Act protections for the Nation’s wetlands, lakes, and streams.

The Time for Action is Now

New guidance from the Administration will clarify which waters are protected under the Clean Water Act, removing confusion for landowners, conservationists and state and local agencies. Providing a stronger, clearer definition of “Waters of the United States” through new guidance and rulemaking is a policy based on commonsense and common ground between conservation and industry interests.

The Corps and EPA took a positive first step this year by submitting draft guidance for public comment. Their proposal respects the Supreme Court’s rulings and related science. The agencies received over 230,000 comments on the guidance. To protect America’s waters, in keeping with the Clean Water Act, this guidance must be finalized quickly. The agencies must also initiate a vigorous and transparent rulemaking process to clarify and reinforce the safeguards and scope of the Clean Water Act for landowners, developers, conservationists and state and federal agencies.

The Corps and EPA are now prepared to take final action – but time is running out.

Clean water sustains lives and livelihoods and habitat for fish and wildlife. Renewing America’s commitment to a strong and effective Clean Water Act also strengthens our country, our quality of life and our commitment to our children and grandchildren.

Related posts

1. Join Our #Protect Clean Water Twitter Torrent!
2. The Senate Against Clean Water
3. What Part of “All” Don’t They Understand?

After almost 3 decades of delay, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is moving to finalize  the scientific re-analysis of the toxicity dioxin.  Dioxin is actually a group of chemicals which are among the most toxic chemicals in the world.  The chemical industry is trying to block the final Dioxin Reassessment.  We wrote to Administrator Jackson urging EPA to keep this important policy moving.

Dioxin is linked to cancer, birth defects, learning problems, reproductive disorders and many other health effects.  It is found in the bodies of people all over the world, and over 170 countries have signed a treaty to phase it out.  We don’t produce dioxin; it’s a by-product of many industrial processes including burning garbage and medical waste.

We don’t need to argue over the science any more. We need to act.  Learn more from our friends at the Center for Health and Environmental Justice here and read our letter here.

No related posts.

Michigan Policy Director Susan Harley is joined by Clean Water Heroes for the release of our Midterm Legislative Scorecard

By Cyndi Roper, Michigan State Director

If you were a Lansing lawmaker with a perfect environmental voting record in 2011, you were voting no.  With a state House majority firmly in control of the legislative agenda, the opportunity to support good environmental protections simply didn’t happen last year.  So the ticket to getting 100% on Clean Water Action’s Midterm Scorecard released today was opposing bad environmental legislation, which is what dominated the Republican majority’s policy agenda.

A majority of Michigan’s State Representatives voted repeatedly in 2011 to whittle away at our water protections using phony job creation arguments as political cover. That’s right.  They argue that weakening protections on Michigan’s lifeblood – its water – will create jobs.  (What kind of water are they drinking?!)  Not surprisingly, their votes have done nothing to create jobs. Zip. Nada.  On the other hand, protecting our Great Lakes and Michigan’s other water treasures creates jobs for today and for our future.

As the House majority fired away at Michigan’s environmental protections, a small but devoted contingent of lawmakers stood their ground in the wake of these attacks.  Clean Water Action honored these 13 Clean Water Heroes and 10 other House members were recognized for their voting records in defense of clean water protections at a Lansing press conference.

Michigan politicians know the state’s voters care about our water so their campaign messages usually include a focus on Great Lakes protection and other water themes.  The distinction between campaign rhetoric and lawmaker voting records tells the real story and, unfortunately, most state lawmakers last year turned their backs on strengthening water protections.

Those absent from Tuesday’s press conference were the majority of lawmakers who received a failing grade. Out of the 67 legislators who scored below 60%, a startling 58 received 0% scores.

I received a call yesterday from a lawmaker who scored south of 50%.  He made the case for why he should have received a higher score based on work he’s done in his district – far from the madness in Lansing.  I respect him for calling me and for making his case.  The problem is that we need lawmakers in Lansing who will stand up to those special interests seeking to undo our water protections.  That’s leadership and that’s what’s lacking in the Michigan House.

If any lawmakers need a road map for doing the right thing, last January Clean Water Action released its Clean Water Action’s Water Protection Agenda, which provides a clear pathway for strengthening Michigan’s water protections and securing our water future.

Related posts

1. Who Wants Dirty Air or Nasty Water?
2. What Now For Clean Water Policies?
3. If it Ain’t Broke… U.S. House Tackles Clean Air, Water & Everybody Loses

Eagles Fans for PA's Forests!

On December 18^th, Clean Water Action staff served as the Community Partner for the Philadelphia Eagles home game against the New York Jets. The Eagles recognized our work raising public awareness about threats to public health and the importance of our person-to-person approach to public education. So, we wondered, what could we do that would both advance our goals and make a fun, quick way of interacting with Eagles fans on game day.

When in doubt, resort to arts and crafts. We wanted to give Eagles fans a chance to stand up for a public resource that everyone cares about in Pennsylvania: state parks and state forests. So we made two huge signs that looked like trees for fans to hold up in photos and show their support for keeping public lands public.

Most Pennsylvanians agree that all the effort the Commonwealth has put into restoring forests lost to the timber industry 100 years ago shouldn’t be squandered to turn a quick buck for the state. The average person wants to keep our public lands public. Hikers, hunters and day trippers enjoy our parks and state forests, and they also provide real environmental services. Forests help to control air pollution and they filter rain water.

Sadly, the state has already leased off too much state forest and park land for eventual use by natural gas drillers. The good news is, though, that Governor Corbett has not (so far) lifted the moratorium on further leasing. We sent him the photos of Eagles fans holding up these signs in order to encourage him to keep the moratorium on.

Giving Clean Water Action this opportunity to interact with fans on game day is just the latest move by the Philadelphia Eagles to go green.  Eagles’ owner Jeff Lurie and his wife Christina are dedicated to making the entire Eagles franchise environmentally sustainable.

The Eagles have approached greening on all levels from recycling, to energy use, to planting forests.   Since 2003, the stadium has been composting and recycling materials, diverting over three million pounds of waste from going into landfills.  The stadium also serves beverages in not plastic cups, but ones made from corn that disintegrate in landfills within 45 days.  All Eagles print publications, in the stadium and behind the scenes, are printed on post-consumer recycled paper that has saved nearly 6,000 trees since 2003.

Lincoln Financial Field, the Eagles stadium, is completely “off the grid,” meaning that 100% of its operations power is generated by sun and wind energy.  In 2010 alone, the environmental benefit of sourcing its power with renewable energy is equivalent to removing 2,184 cars from the road.  The team takes it a step further for their road games.  All travel for the entire Eagles squad in 2010 was carbon neutral.  They fulfilled this by planting trees in Louisiana’s Lake Ophelia National Wildlife Refuge in the Mississippi River valley to offset their travels carbon footprint.

The day we visited Lincoln Financial Field, the Eagles victoriously beat out the New York Jets 45 to 19and, Clean Water Action had the opportunity to mingle in the tailgate with Eagles fans from all the state.  We talked to hunters, students, retirees, and the great majority of the fans we talked to were strong supporters in upholding the moratorium on drilling in our state forests.  Even NY fans expressed their support for protecting valuable public lands here in PA.

Thanks so much to the Philadelphia Eagles for letting us be a part of Game Day and to all the fans who grabbed one of our signs and stood up for forests. You can see a bunch of them holding up our signs proudly here.

No related posts.

On the first day back after the New Year, with 2011 and all the resolution making behind us, I wondered what would be in store for our work in 2012.  If yesterday’s Washington Post is any indication, maybe we’ll find a renewed understanding of the critical need to protect public health and natural resources.

On the front page, above the fold, we learned that our nation’s public water systems and waste water systems  need to upgrade and replace our water infrastructure to the tune of over $300 billion.  That’s a tough reality to accept, but it’s true.   Our systems are old and they’re crumbling.  It’s time our water infrastructure got the same public attention that is paid to our roads.  I really liked this sentence, because it’s a fact we don’t hear enough: “Although they are out of sight and out of mind except when they spring a leak, water and sewer systems are more vital to civilized society that any other aspect of infrastructure.”  Meeting our infrastructure needs and acting like preventing contamination of drinking water is Job #1, rather than more Congressional attacks on water protection, is a debate I’d love to have in 2012.

Still on the front page was a piece, “Case Ignites Conservative Ire over EPA.”  This story is about a controversy over development in a wetland in Idaho.  “Wetlands” sound esoteric, but they’re essential for filtering pollution and preventing flooding. They’re as vital a part of our water infrastructure as our 19^th century pipes. Unfortunately, the story framed  wetlands protection as a conservative versus liberal issue.  My hope for 2012 is that we stop calling those who oppose Clean Water Act programs “conservative.”  There are plenty of people who consider themselves conservative, but understand the importance of protecting our water infrastructure.

I can’t think of another time I would have found 3 stories on the front page relating to our work, but this morning’s read also included Joel Achenbach’s thoughtful piece “At the Helm of ‘Spaceship Earth’: A New Brand of Environmentalist Calls for Man to Take Charge.”  The ideas are thought-provoking. I don’t know yet what I think about engineering our way out of our health and resource challenges, but I hope 2012 is a year for thinking outside the box and recognizing that we have created existential problems but that we can reap huge benefits from solving them.  We can start today – send a note to the President about fixing the Clean Water Act.

Related posts

1. They came to the District
2. Philadelphia Eagles are the leading Green Team
3. The Latest Dirty Water Bill: a Temper Tantrum in Writing

This piece first appeared on the Huffington Post

First, the good: A few weeks ago, the State of Colorado passed the strongest rules in the United States for publicly disclosing what cancer-causing and other types chemicals are used in oil and gas fracking. In a ground-breaking and intense set of negotiations between oil and gas companies and environmentalists, frackers are now forced to publicly disclose when they are fracking and what chemicals they use in fracking.

This disclosure gets at two very serious concerns posed by fracking: 1) when fracking pollution occurs in groundwater, in streams, or on land, the public should be able to connect that pollution back to the fracking chemicals that caused it, and 2) it will allow landowners to test their wells and groundwater prior to fracking, and then re-test after fracking to check for fracking pollution.

Importantly, the new rules substantively removed the “trade secret loophole” that was proposed in the original version of the rules that would have allowed frackers to not disclose the names of the chemicals in fracking fluids by saying those chemicals were “trade secrets.” Led by attorneys from Earthjustice in Denver, the environmental community held its ground against this ridiculous exemption.

Thank you, industry leaders, Governor Hickenlooper, and environmentalists for passing these new rules.

Now for the bad: These new rules do nothing to stop or slow down fracking, do nothing to address the fracking pollution that’s already occurred, and do nothing to directly protect water, land, wildlife, or people from oil and gas pollution and fracking. These rules simply allow the cancer-causing chemicals to be named and tested for after the poisoning and pollution may have occurred.

Obviously, there’s still a long way to go to protect Coloradans from fracking. What, at an absolute minimum, needs to happen next?

First, like the laws passed a few years ago to protect Coloradans from in situ leach uranium mining, oil and gas companies and frackers should be required to prove that they have not polluted or poisoned your property and should be required to pay for long-term groundwater monitoring. If a company is injecting cancer-causing chemicals into the ground on your property, why should you have to pay for the expensive groundwater and lab tests? Frackers should pay to prove that your land and water is clean and protected, not the other way around.

Second, the industry should be required to better manage fracking chemicals, drilling water, and fracking wastes so that pollution and poisoning does not occur.

For example, in Weld County alone which has more active oil and gas wells than any county in America (almost 18,000), public documents on the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s (COGCC) website reveal that there have been over 1,000 “Spill Incident Reports,” over 800 “Notice of Alleged Violations,” and hundreds of public complaints associated with oil and gas drilling and fracking. Pollution and poisoning water and land are occurring — much of that due to mistakes that involve spilling frack fluids, improperly handling drilling wastes, improperly lining waste ponds.

Third, far more “Mechanical Integrity Tests” by state regulators should occur on drilling and fracking jobs in Colorado. Again, public COGCC documents reveal that of the nearly 18,000 wells in Weld County, there have only been 232 tests reported by state regulators to make sure the well casing is intact so that fracking chemicals cannot migrate back up the bore hole.

Fourth, the oil and gas industry needs to collect and publicly disclose the amount of water they use for drilling and fracking and the source of that water. All of Colorado has very serious water supply and river protection problems already — though likely in the billions of gallons per year, the amount of water used in fracking is still relatively unknown as is the source of that water as drilling and fracking continue to march across the landscape slurping up farm, city, and river water.

Finally, the ugly: The director of COGCC has recently been quoted as saying that the “first line of defense” against the threat of drilling and fracking pollution is to maintain the “integrity of the wellbore” to make sure fracking chemicals do not migrate into groundwater.

I completely disagree.

The first line of defense against the threat of drilling and fracking pollution is to aggressively switch to a clean energy economy. Remember those words — “clean energy?” They were the two words most often spoke by our previous pro-environment governor, Bill Ritter, but now are completely lost in the public debate. Windmills, solar panels, biofuels — remember all that?

Instead, the public debate has become insane: Billions of gallons of clean water are drained out of Colorado’s endangered rivers every year in order to mix that water with cancer-causing fracking chemicals and then inject that toxic cocktail in the ground around our homes, schools, and farms in order to extract non-renewable global-warming-causing fossil fuels that are being burned at a faster and faster rate. But, insanely, the public debate at the state level is almost solely about making sure everyone knows the name of the cancer-causing fracking chemicals.

Colorado made a good start with its new fracking rules, but has a long way to go to stop our health, our economy, and our state from really getting ugly.


Gary Wockner, Ph.D., is director of Save the Poudre and Colorado program director for Clean Water Action in Fort Collins.

Related posts

1. Fracking New Jersey
2. If We’re Going to Rein-in Something, Make it Fracking!
3. Who’s watching the frackers in Colorado?

Kerry organizes communities Monday through Friday year-round (in every type of weather) doing door-to-door environmental education and fundraising campaigns. She has been with the organization for seven years – her unrelenting dedication to helping protect the environment and public health is remarkable and has touched the lives of many.

It’s December, and I just saw lightning. At first, I thought it was the strobing LED peppermint candy Christmas lights, but then I got a text message from a trainee: “Kerry, what do we do when there’s lightning?” Darn.

As a seven year field organizing veteran, this is not the worst weather I have ever seen, but it will definitely crack the Top 20. My umbrella has been shredded, and my clipboard is almost too wet to sign. The last stop of my night is a house with a seemingly endless driveway where a young mother has *not* promised to write a letter and leave it on her door. She didn’t say “no” either, though, but she promised to think about the issue after I left and write the letter if she decided she agreed, so here I am climbing her driveway in driving rain because canvassers are inherently optimists.

Currently in New Jersey, our field organizing (canvass) staff is gathering letters to support the Child Safe Playing Fields Act, legislation that would prohibit the use of toxic pesticides on ball fields and playgrounds where children play.

It’s a great bill, but apparently some NJ legislators are concerned that, without pesticides, the dirt will get so hard-packed that children will break bones when they fall on it. Memo to NJ politicians: In several months of canvassing on this bill, I have heard many concerns raised by parents and landscapers, but not once has someone pondered the femur-shattering power of organic soccer fields.

One thing that young moms do worry about is predatory insects, chock full of the zombie apocalypse virus, lying in wait on the ball fields. The young mom of this December thunderstorm raised that question immediately.

Good news! The bill specifically addresses the ball fields and the playground equipment, not the other park areas. Mosquitoes breed in standing water, and ticks like to hang out in wooded areas and tall grass, so unless your local parks and rec team built a swing-set in a swamp or likes to keep the grass on the soccer field at three feet to slow down play, these should not be problem areas.

But what if ticks slather on the sunscreen and venture out of their native habitat and onto the sun-washed grass of the local soccer fields? Maybe the tick parents wanted them to learn about teamwork and signed them up for a youth tick soccer league. Maybe there are tick parents preparing orange slices for after the match right now! Well have no fear New Jersey parents. The Child Safe Playing Fields Act provides exemptions for immediate threats to human health, such as tick youth soccer leagues.

What the act is designed to do is protect kids where they play from chemicals that can impact their development, irritate their lungs, and even cause cancer.

A Letter for Safe Playing Fields

Chemical applications for aesthetic purposes are the true target of the act. We can have lovely playing fields for New Jersey’s children without covering them in toxins to take out the dandelions. And besides, what is a Little League right fielder supposed to do if there are no dandelions to play with? Pay attention to the game?

Hopefully, the young mom whose driveway I was climbing had come around to this line of thinking, as well. I stepped onto her stoop, looked at her door, and there it was – an envelope stuffed with letters in support of the bill with pictures drawn by her children. I plucked them out of her Christmas wreath and tucked them into my coat. One more mother for clean and safe parks.

No related posts.

For the past decade, Clean Water Action has led the fight to restore pollution protections for small streams, wetlands and other water bodies that risk being poisoned or destroyed by developers, Big Coal or other polluters because of weak Clean Water Act policies adopted by the last Bush Administration.  These weak policies were adopted in response to two misguided Supreme Court decisions in 2001 and 2006, which effectively reversed nearly three decades of regulatory history.  Prior to these two court decisions, federal agencies asserted broad authority over most rivers, lakes, streams and wetlands.

Why are these small streams and wetlands so important? Headwater and other small streams (even those that do not contain water year-round) flow into the drinking water supplies of nearly 117 million Americans.  Wetlands filter pollutants out of water, reducing the amount of pollution that enters nearby rivers and streams.  Wetlands also absorb floodwaters – one acre of wetland can typically hold one million gallons of water, which is enough water to fill 20,000 bath tubs!   There is a strong economic benefit for protecting small streams and wetlands, too.  For example, in the early 1990’s, New York City decided it was far more cost effective for it to work with upstream landowners to protect the watersheds that feed into the City’s drinking water supply than to invest billions of dollars in building a water filtration facility.

Fortunately, the Obama Administration recognizes the environmental and economic benefits of strong clean water protections.  In April 2011, they introduced new Clean Water Act Guidance to fix some of the gaps left in the previous Administration’s clean water policy. The Obama Administration also made it clear that they intend to propose new regulations in early 2012, which would go even further to restore protections to streams, wetlands and other waters.  Over 200,000 comments were submitted on the Guidance and the majority of comments voiced support for strong clean water protections.

Despite broad public support for strong clean water protections, some members in Congress seem willing to stop at nothing to block the Administration from moving forward on these protections.  Why? Because powerful special interests such as Big Coal want a free pass to pollute our waters.   Don’t let the voice of Big Coal drown out your own – tell President Obama that you support clean water!

In addition to writing President Obama a letter, you can join our Twitter Torrent on Thursday, December 15^th!   Beginning at 10am (ET) and continuing all day, Clean Water Action and our ally organizations will be tweeting up a storm to remind President Obama that we are counting on him to protect clean water.   Please join us!

Related posts

1. What Now For Clean Water Policies?
2. The Senate Against Clean Water
3. The Clean Water Movement

Over the last couple weeks Clean Water Action and our allies have been fighting tooth and nail in the Senate against a massive affront to the Clean Water Act, the Barrasso-Heller Amendment.  This Amendment would permanently cut all funding from The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) and the EPA to classify levels of protection for water sources.   Luckily, with your help, we have had a great deal of impact on this Amendment.  Voting has been pushed back, allowing us more time to rally support for clean streams, wetlands, and drinking water for all Americans.

As usual we are hearing quite a bit of rhetoric about “job killing” and “land grabbing” from our opposition.  This is nothing new, but it does mislead people into anger and discontent. We’ve had enough and we have decided to return fire, with truth.

Our opponents would like you to think this amendment will cause unnecessary regulatory burdens, will hinder economic growth, and will drastically expand the scope of the Clean Water Act.  The truth is this amendment will complicate the process to obtain building permits and overwhelm our judicial system with complicated requests.  Time and again the Courts have supported the ACE and EPA’s authority to issue guidance to handle these concerns, keeping applications that would result in positive economic growth from being stuffed into miscellaneous drawers and files due to overly complicated and muddled standards.

Currently half of America’s streams and 20 million acres of wetlands do not qualify for the protections promised to them all the way back in 1972 when the Clean Water Act was passed.  The original intention was to provide protection for all of America’s water.  When this amendment is defeated it will not increase the scope of the Clean Water Act.  It will simply allow government agencies who have been trusted, by the people and the courts, to continue to make the same decisions they have been making for over 30 years.  It will allow these agencies to continue to take opinions from the American people and put these words into action through real world protections for waterways across our great nation.  If this Amendment is passed our water quality will decrease, there’s no two ways about it.  It does no good to have a speed limit if you don’t have the police officer to enforce it.

To a certain extent I can understand a level of confusion on the exact ramifications of issues such as amendments to appropriations bills, it is often difficult to understand and even more so to explain.   However, our opponents are going beyond a possible confusion of details and over the line into pure untruths.  Again, this is not new, but the American people deserve to be properly informed on all issues, especially concerning a liquid that every single American ingests on a daily basis.  This is why Clean Water Action is here; for you, for your children, for our water, for America.

No related posts.