Given the current controversy about healthcare reform, it appears that the proposed Clean Water Restoration Act (CWRA) is unlikely to become law in 2009. Accordingly, the Rapanos decision will continue to govern the federal wetlands regulatory program for the foreseeable future.
The Rapanos decision offers a better policy for stimulating economic recovery than the Clean Water Restoration Act. Are there any other good reasons for maintaining the status-quo?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Johnny Stevens,
Senator Russ Feingold and Representative Jim Oberstar co-sponsored the proposed Clean Water Restoration Act, which would have restored CWA jurisdiction to its pre-SWANCC boundaries. This legislation has been on-hold in Congress and has received very little support from the Obama Administration.
Both Feingold and Oberstar lost in the recent election and now there is even less impetus to pass new legislation to remedy CWA jurisdiction. The confusion, inconsistency, uncertainty and controversy surrounding jurisdictional issues will continue unabated for the foreseeable future.
