Washington, D.C. – Only days after calling upon the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reverse it’s out of touch regulation that would severely jeopardize the due process rights of Americans nationwide, Alaskan Congressman Don Young Wednesday announced the agency has relented.
Earlier this month, the EPA issued a final notice in the Federal Register claiming the authority to “garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order.” The quiet but divisive decision was fast-tracked by the EPA to take effect on September 2, 2014, unless it received large public outcry by the end of the August 1st comment period.
“What we have here is a rogue federal agency that believes it exists and operates above the law and the Constitution,” said Congressman Don Young. “For the EPA to think they can issue this type of ruling, let alone without a proper review process, is absolutely astonishing to me. My colleagues and I understand that federal entities must have practices in place to enforce their rules and ensure the payment of reasonable fines, however we believe these decisions must be made in the court of law, not by a group that believes they can unilaterally garnish someone’s wages. Americans deserve proper due process and today’s reversal by the EPA is a positive step in that direction.”
In a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, Congressman Young and more than 25 of his House colleagues called upon the agency to reverse its claim and respect due process rights of Americans across the country. The group was also quick to note that the amount of fines collected by the EPA has drastically increased from $96 million in 2009 to $252 million in 2013, which indicates that some of these fines may be excessive.
“This claim seems to violate American citizens’ Constitutionally-guaranteed right to due process by placing the burden of proof on the debtor, rather than the agency,” Congressman Young wrote. “The process for challenging fines and wage garnishment is not satisfactory because it allows the agency to decide if the accused can even present a defense. We are writing to voice our strongest opposition to the rule and the EPA’s inadequate engagement with the public concerning it. Further, we ask that you reverse your decision and not follow through with this rule. By doing so, your agency will demonstrate respect for the right to due process under the law that is guaranteed to all Americans by the Constitution.”
In addition to the July 9th letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy (full text found below), Congressman Young and 20 of his House colleagues introduced H.J.RES.118 to express congressional disapproval of the EPA rule relating to the garnishment of non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed to the United States without first obtaining a court order.
According to numerous news reports, the EPA will formally reverse its final rule Thursday in the Federal Register.
Full letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy:
Dear Administrator McCarthy:
We are writing to express our deep concerns with a recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claim to have authority to “garnish non-Federal wages to collect delinquent non-tax debts owed the United States without first obtaining a court order.”
This claim seems to violate American citizens’ Constitutionally-guaranteed right to due process by placing the burden of proof on the debtor, rather than the agency. The process for challenging fines and wage garnishment is not satisfactory because it allows the agency to decide if the accused can even present a defense.
The increasingly punitive nature of the agency is also of concern. According to the agency’s annual reports, the amount of fines collected by the EPA has gone from $96 million in 2009 to $252 million in 2013. Though we agree stakeholders must be responsible and the EPA should enforce rules reasonably, the more than 160 percent increase in a span of only four years indicates that some of these fines may have been excessive.
The EPA has said the rule was not subject to review because it is not a “significant regulatory action.” But it has recently been reported that a Wyoming homeowner was threatened with a $75,000 fine for building a pond on his property. That might seem like a drop in the bucket to a bureaucratic agency with a multi-billion dollar budget, but for the vast majority of Americans, $75,000 is a lot of money. The proposed rule would make it both more difficult to dispute such fines and provide incentive for the EPA to issue penalties against more Americans. Its impact, therefore, would certainly create “significant” hardships on affected individuals.
The agency has fast-tracked the rule to take effect on September 2nd, 2014 absent sufficient opposing comment by August 1st, 2014. We are writing to voice our strongest opposition to the rule and the EPA’s inadequate engagement with the public concerning it. Further, we ask that you reverse your decision and not follow through with this rule. By doing so, your agency will demonstrate respect for the right to due process under the law that is guaranteed to all Americans by the Constitution.
