Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson said yesterday that he inserted a provision in the House-passed spending bill that would block U.S. EPA from asserting broader regulatory authority over wetlands than it had during the George W. Bush administration.

Simpson, chairman of the House Interior-EPA Appropriations Subcommittee, anonymously inserted the language -- one of several EPA-blocking provisions -- into the original text of a larger spending bill that the House passed on Feb. 19. The temporary spending measure, which the Senate has yet to take up, aims to fund the federal government through the end of September (Greenwire, Feb. 14).

"We tried to put it in the bill last year," Simpson said of the provision. As the top Republican on the then-Democrat-controlled subcommittee last year, Simpson introduced the same provision in the form of an amendment, which failed in a 5-9, party line vote (E&E Daily, July 23, 2010).

The Simpson language, which he said he hopes to include in the appropriations bill for 2012 as well, would prevent EPA from spending any money to "implement, administer, or enforce" regulation or policy pertaining to the definition of what waters are covered under the Clean Water Act and thus, subject to federal regulation.

The agriculture and homebuilding industries have lobbied aggressively to stop the Obama administration's EPA from replacing a Bush-era policy that established jurisdiction that critics say is too narrow and rolled back pollution protections. EPA has since delayed or dropped hundreds of investigations because of uncertainties created by the Bush policy and two preceding Supreme Court rulings that failed to draw a clear line around which wetlands are protected.

Simpson said he was surprised that nobody introduced an amendment on the floor of the House during the debate last month to strip the language from the bill, "which you would have thought they would have" if it were unpopular, he said in an interview yesterday.

Instead, he said, House members introduced dozens of other amendments seeking to handcuff EPA (E&ENews PM, Feb. 15).

"I always wondered, is it just my region?" Simpson said. "Because every time I go home, I hear from individuals, cities, counties, businesses, the state, everybody, about the EPA, and I was surprised there were that many amendments addressing EPA concerns that people had, which tells me it's not just my region. It's across the country. And the EPA ought to get the message, that there is concern about what they're doing and the impact it will have on jobs in this country."

Simpson received $164,540, or about 20 percent of his campaign contributions, from industries that oppose EPA's efforts to reassert its Clean Water Act authority, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Josh Saks, senior legislative representative for water resources campaigns at the National Wildlife Federation, said Simpson's position as head of the House appropriations subcommittee confirms that his proposal on EPA has the endorsement of the GOP leadership.

"This is not a rogue member," Saks said. "This is a concerted effort by the leadership of the Republican Party to roll back environmental protection and stymie it any way they can."