Tuesday, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill to prevent new federal oversight of state wetlands and waterways.
According to the Tampa Bay Times, the bill was sponsored by Rep. Steve Southerland, R-Fla., and passed the House by a 262-152 margin. The bill received support from 35 Democrats.
Southerland said on the House floor that increased federal oversight of water resources “would have devastating consequences on virtually every major section of our economy, including farming, construction, manufacturing, transportation and energy development.” Southerland expanded on his support for the bill in a statement, saying the bill will allow the United States “to keep our waters cleaner in the future.”
At first glance, Southerland’s proposal seems like a reasonable one. After all, Florida’s natural resources are especially fragile and unique. Some might argue that state regulators understand Florida’s environmental needs better than the bureaucracy of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Unfortunately, if Southerland expects to rely on Florida regulators to oversee the state’s environmental standards, the Sunshine State’s water resources could be in a world of trouble.
During the administration of Gov. Rick Scott, environmental regulation and oversight in Florida has been cut to the bone.
Politifact detailed the ways that Scott has eviscerated the state’s environmental protection infrastructure. The measures included cutting dozens of Department of Environmental Protection employees, forcing state water management districts to “slash property tax collections” by millions of dollars, and reducing the DEP’s enforcement caseload from more than 2,000 in 2010 to less than 150 through the first five months of 2014.
After an increase during Scott’s first year in office, DEP spending has declined from $1.8 billion in the 2011-2012 fiscal year to just $1.3 billion in 2014. Both those figures pale in comparison to environmental spending during the Charlie Crist and Jeb Bush administrations. In 2006, DEP appropriations reached a high of $2.9 billion and have generally declined ever since.
Fortunately for Florida’s environment and those who care deeply about it, Southerland’s bill has little chance of even being debated in the Senate, much less being passed.
The fact that the bill was heavily supported by real-estate developers and strongly opposed by every major environmental group demonstrates where Southerland’s true motivations lie.
Southerland would rather curry favor with potential campaign donors than serve the interests of the people and the land he was elected to represent.
At a time when global carbon dioxide emissions are at record highs and the temperature of the Earth is rising to a dangerous level, protecting the environment in every way possible must remain a high priority.
Florida deserves elected officials who will act as good stewards of the fragile environmental treasures that citizens of the Sunshine State cherish so dearly.
[A version of this story ran on page 6 on 9/11/2014 under the headline "Florida House bill threatens state waterways"]
