Jacob Prall
[email protected]

Seems like clean water’s been on everyone’s mind lately. First, we had the drought in California, then the Flint, Michigan, lead water fiasco; the importance of clean and accessible drinking water has become clear. It shouldn’t be a privilege but a guarantee. Clean water can be harder to accrue in an agricultural state such as Iowa.

Iowa’s economy is tied to the crops that cover its landscape. Farming, pesticides, and the like kill bugs and increase growth rates; unfortunately, all those chemicals drip into streams, rivers, and lakes. The EPA created the Clean Water Act in 1972 to manage this sort of pollution. In some places, it has worked. In Iowa, it has not. Iowa has gotten past government regulations by having a large number of small bodies of water, and in this scenario, size matters.

The Clean Water Act is a little vague when it comes to what body water sizes fall under its jurisdiction. The Clean Water Rule, a new EPA amendment to the Clean Water Act, makes what does and doesn’t qualify as a body of water much clearer. It had to make this rule in part because of the thoroughly polluted waters of places such as Iowa.

Farmers tend to oppose such regulations, because they can decrease productivity. Mandates should be made to ensure accountability for pollution, because it’s important to preserve the natural resources of Iowa. Who among us hasn’t swum in a lake, fished in a river, or splashed in an Iowan stream? And who among us hasn’t gulped water from our faucets? To uphold the integrity of these amenities, regulations have to be in place.

Our own Sen. Joni Ernst crafted a bill opposing the Clean Water Rule. Spearheaded by Ernst and the food-industry lobby, the bill found its way past both floors of Congress and into the lap of President Obama. Given the choice, Obama returned to sender.

Yes, a veto; the ninth veto of a president who’s been in office for nearly eight years. That’s a remarkably low number. President George H.W. Bush vetoed 44 bills in a single term. However, Obama’s record might have more to do with low productivity in Congress than to do with his approval or ambivalence about congressional bills.

Our dear Ernst is rather ruffled by the president’s decision. She’s vowed to find a way around him, to liberate Iowan farmers of their responsibility to the environment. Commenting on Ernst’s proposal, Obama said he just couldn’t support it, as the American people require “the regulatory certainty and clarity needed to invest in projects that rely on clean water.” Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey harmonized with Ernst’s concerns. The two are as convinced as any Republican that the EPA is out to control the lands of these United States, that the EPA is overreaching and meddling in private affairs. But private affairs have public consequences. Think anything from Flint to monopolies.

A federal government is responsible to all of its people. If the farming community is affected by the decision to end environmentally unsafe practices, so be it. It’s imperative that we as Iowans, and we as humans stand up for a cleaner, sustainable Iowa and country.