Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Family found dead in Ohio home
Robbers order bar patrons to empty pockets
Man gets 3 years in prison for having sex with horse
Sex-toy study at Duke University raises some eyebrows
Akron man turns himself in after authorities turn up heat
Get ready for detour, delays on Route 8
Man appears alive at own funeral
Blogs:
Pets:
Not 101 Dalmations…but close!
The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook
Patrick McManamon:
Saturday entertainment, one more time …
Akron Zips:
No. 1 UA soccer remains perfect, Zips football defeats rival Flashes
Tribe Matters:
Tribe makes roster moves
Cleveland Browns:
Lewis doesn't like boycott
Kent State Sports:
Kent State falls to Akron, 20-28
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Knicks
Buckeye Blogging:
Weekly ‘B’ Deck Report – New Mexico St.
Varsity Letters:
Wrestling, bowling teams prepare for season
All Da King's Men:
Bigger And Better Boondoggles
Blog of Mass Destruction:
The Shooter
Akron Law Café:
NEW U.S. Supreme Court Database
See Jane Style:
Muffle Your Muffler
Car Chase:
Perfect Weather for an Autumn Drive
Let's Talk Real Estate:
RUMORS: Downtown Restaurant Explosion
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jack is looking for a trip to Southern Ohio the week of November 16.
Sound Check:
The Black Keys to perform benefit concert at Musica on November 27
HRLite House:
Personal Rant – Why People Do Not Live in Northeast Ohio
Akron Gamer:
New 'Call of Duty' could set entertainment record
A chance for Congress to clarify a landmark environmental law
POSTED: 10:20 a.m. EDT, May 14, 2009
When Congress approved the landmark Clean Water Act in 1972, its intent was clear: Protect the nation's lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands from unregulated pollution and destruction. The country made substantial progress in repairing and restoring the integrity of its waters.
Who would turn the clock back on the Cuyahoga River or elsewhere in the country?
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court, in two misguided rulings, departed from what had been working for three decades. The justices narrowed the scope of the law and left regulators confused about its implementation. The result? Myriad streams and wetlands have been left vulnerable to development.
Now Congress has an opportunity to reassert the original intent of the act by approving the Clean Water Restoration Act. The effort begins in the Senate, committee work now nearing a conclusion, George Voinovich well-placed to advance the worthy cause.
The Ohio Republican understandably looks to strike a balance between economic interests and environmental protection. That actually has been the legacy of the act, prosperity linked to sound stewardship of natural resources. Most important, in this instance, is the need to assert first principles, clarifying the broad jurisdiction of all the country's waters, making plain the natural connections, from the Ohio River, say, to the seemingly isolated wetland, its value in preventing floods often unnoticed.
Thirty-seven years ago, Congress applied federal authority in an enlightened way. Now it must reaffirm the commitment to protect the nation's waters.
When Congress approved the landmark Clean Water Act in 1972, its intent was clear: Protect the nation's lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands from unregulated pollution and destruction. The country made substantial progress in repairing and restoring the integrity of its waters.
Who would turn the clock back on the Cuyahoga River or elsewhere in the country?
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court, in two misguided rulings, departed from what had been working for three decades. The justices narrowed the scope of the law and left regulators confused about its implementation. The result? Myriad streams and wetlands have been left vulnerable to development.
Now Congress has an opportunity to reassert the original intent of the act by approving the Clean Water Restoration Act. The effort begins in the Senate, committee work now nearing a conclusion, George Voinovich well-placed to advance the worthy cause.
The Ohio Republican understandably looks to strike a balance between economic interests and environmental protection. That actually has been the legacy of the act, prosperity linked to sound stewardship of natural resources. Most important, in this instance, is the need to assert first principles, clarifying the broad jurisdiction of all the country's waters, making plain the natural connections, from the Ohio River, say, to the seemingly isolated wetland, its value in preventing floods often unnoticed.
Thirty-seven years ago, Congress applied federal authority in an enlightened way. Now it must reaffirm the commitment to protect the nation's waters.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
