One of the most difficult problems to fix with our federal government is the bureaucracy or what is known as the Administrative State. Unelected bureaucrats impose their will on good citizens and these government tyrants are not accountable to congress or the courts. They expand federal power and abuse taxpayers routinely.
Take this case from the Environmental Protection Agency, a well-known abuser of the public.
This week, in a small victory for private landowners, the United States Supreme Court announced that it will hear the case of an Idaho couple who have been in a 15-year battle with the EPA over plans to build a home on their residential lot.
In 2004, the couple bought a vacant lot and obtained local permits to build a home. But when they started the construction process, the EPA suddenly ordered them to stop work claiming the property contained a wetland.
Here’s the kicker, the lot lacks a surface water connection to any stream, creek, lake, or other water body, and it shouldn’t be subject to federal regulation and permitting. But that didn’t stop the EPA from prohibiting the couple from constructing their home and threatening the family with fines of up to $75,000 per day.
The Clean Water Act has a seemingly simple purpose: protect the navigable waters of the United States from pollution. The federal agencies charged with carrying out and enforcing the law, however, have expanded the definition of “navigable waters” several times since the Act went on the books in 1972.
The Supreme Court will consider whether their lot contains “navigable waters” subject to federal control. This ordeal is emblematic of all that has gone wrong with the implementation of the Clean Water Act. Let’s hope the Court rules to bring fairness, consistency, and a respect for private property rights to the Clean Water Act’s administration.
