Mr. President, today is the 35th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, one of this nation’s landmark environmental laws.

Since 1972, the Clean Water Act has provided essential protection for our nation’s waters that enhance and contribute to human health and well-being, the economy, and the environment. Yet, as we celebrate the 35-year anniversary of the enactment of the Clean Water Act, federal protections of surface waters that provide drinking water to an estimated 110 million Americans remain threatened until the U.S. Congress acts. Two recent U.S. Supreme Court cases have jeopardized the protection of these and many other of our nation’s waters by calling into question the Clean Water Act protections for entire categories of waters.

In the 2006 consolidated cases of Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Supreme Court left more than half of our nation’s waters without federal protections. The impact of that decision is compounded by the 2001 case Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), in which the U.S. Supreme Court limited the authority of federal agencies to extend Clean Water Act protections to certain wetlands traditionally protected based on their use by migratory birds.

The implications of the recent Supreme Court decisions are disturbing for the safety of our drinking water, habitats for wildlife, and fragile ecosystems around the country. At the crux of the debate is the term “navigable waters,” which the Supreme Court used to restrict the scope of the Clean Water Act in ways never intended by Congress. The fundamental purpose of the Clean Water Act of 1972 was to protect the nation’s waters from pollution rather than just sustain the navigability of waterways.

That is why Congress extended protections to “waters of the United States,” and the Environmental Protection Agency’s and Army Corps of Engineers’ regulations have properly established the scope of waters—including all interstate and intrastate waters—needed to be protected in order to maintain the “chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters,” as called for in the Act. This goal cannot be achieved if Congress does not restore protections that the Supreme Court stripped from 53 to 59 percent of the total length of U.S. streams (excluding Alaska) and at least 20 million acres of so-called “isolated” wetlands in the lower 48 states, as estimated by the EPA.

Mr. President, it is important to understand that though the recent court cases focused on dredge and fill permits under Section 404, the definition of “waters of the United States” is integral to the federal government’s jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act as a whole. This definition is the linchpin for state water quality standards under §302 and §303, national performance standards under §306, toxic and pretreatment standards under §307, oil and hazardous substance liability under §311, aquaculture standards under §318, state water quality certifications under §401, and national pollution discharge permitting requirements under section §402.

In light of these Supreme Court decisions, Congress must reaffirm the original intent of the Clean Water Act and our commitment to ensuring that Americans have clean, safe water. The Clean Water Restoration Act, which I have introduced, will re-establish protection for all waters historically covered by the Clean Water Act. It will end the legal wrangling over the definition of waters protected by the original Clean Water Act by defining “waters of the United States” based on the longstanding definitions in EPA and U.S. Army Corps regulations.

It is a straightforward, surgical fix. Unfortunately, special interest and industry groups that opposed the Clean Water Act in 1972 are back at it again, trying to sabotage any legislation that restores critical clean water protections. They are making claims that “every wet area” will be regulated, which could not be further from the truth – from the downright silly accusation that swimming pools will be regulated to the flat-out incorrect accusation that groundwater will be regulated. My legislation does not broaden the scope of the Clean Water Act.

Congress should not stand aside while the courts roll back more than thirty years of federal protections for our waters. On the 35th anniversary of the enactment of the Clean Water Act, we must step in to bring clarity to a law left murky by the U.S. Supreme Court.