Showing Support for the Clean Water Rule

Voices from all across the United States are speaking up for the protection of clean water. Check out what these folks from Colorado, Ohio, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas have to say this week about why clean water is important for each of them.

EPA regs clarify Clean Water Act – Helena Independent Record, 7/27

“The Clean Water Act has served Montana and the nation well. Its reach is now being pilloried for two simple reasons: raw politics and polluter profits. As for EPA accountability, we should demand as much or more from the industries and politicians engaged in spreading fear about a tool that has kept drinking water clean, wetlands available to soak up floodwaters and headwaters full of trout.”

Senators must work to preserve Clean Water Rule – Las Cruces Sun-News, 7/26

“Clean water is essential to New Mexicans’ health, our happiness, and our economic vitality. From the San Juan to the Rio Grande, rivers provide us with drinking water. When that water is polluted, even at relatively low levels, we increase our risk of liver disease, kidney disease, and even cancer. All of us are affected by unhealthy water quality, but Latinos have been disproportionately so. For example, more than one-third of U.S. Latinos live in states supplied with water by the Colorado River basin — a major river system affected by toxic pollution.”

Understanding why EPA’s water ruling under fire – The Coloradoan, 7/26

“Colorado is extraordinary for many reasons, but one of the most important is our position as the headwaters of much of the southwest U.S. With one or two exceptions the rivers that flow through Colorado flow out of the state, into the thirsty Southwest or, eventually, into the Gulf of Mexico down the Mississippi River.”

Proposed Clean Water Rule follows Baker’s vision of stewardship – Knoxville News Sentinel, 7/26

“As a conservative, I easily can find fault with many Obama administration policies, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s recently proposed Clean Water Rule is not one of them. The long-overdue rule was made necessary by a muddled Supreme Court decision back in 2006, where the justices split three ways in their interpretation of the Clean Water Act’s scope.”

Clean Water Rule nets wide support from Minnesota anglers, hunters – Public News Service, 7/23

“When it comes to protecting smaller streams and wetlands in Minnesota, among those casting wide support for the latest rule on what’s covered under the Clean Water Act are those who fish and hunt.”

Ohio sportsmen and women: smaller streams need protections – Morrow County Sentinel, 7/23

“Some of Ohio’s 110,000 miles of streams could lose potential environmental protections as Congress considers rescinding a recent EPA rule that extends Clean Water Act standards to smaller streams and wetlands. A poll released today by the National Wildlife Federation finds 83 percent of hunters and anglers support the rule.”

Clean Water Rule would guard streams that flow into Trinity – Star-Telegram, 7/22

“The new Environmental Protection Agency rule that closes loopholes in the Clean Water Act is the single greatest victory for clean water in over a decade. The rule, known as the Waters of the U.S. rule, guarantees federal safeguards to all of the headwaters and streams that help keep bodies of water like Barton Springs, the Colorado River and Galveston Bay clean. This rule restores protections to 143,000 miles of streams that feed the drinking water sources for 11.5 million Texans.”

Countering misinformation about Clean Water Act – York Dispatch, 7/21

“Our country is incredibly fortunate that back in 1972 our elected representatives recognized that our economy, our very way of life, is inextricably tied to clean water. The same river that once caught on fire now supports an annual run of salmon.”

Share This