[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S754-S755]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DOMENICI:
  S. 222. A bill to establish an advisory commission to provide advice 
and recommendations on the creation of an integrated, coordinated 
Federal policy designed to prepare for and respond to serious drought 
emergencies; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.


             the national drought policy study act of 1997

  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that I 
believe will finally start us down the long neglected road of 
developing a coherent, integrated, and coordinated national drought 
policy. I offer this legislation, Mr. President, in the wake of one of 
the most devastating droughts the southwestern United States has seen 
in a century, a drought for which there was simply no preparation at 
either Federal, State, or local levels.
  Mr. President, some people do not consider a drought to be a 
disaster, but if live in a drought, and live through a drought, it is 
just as much a disaster as a tornado or an earthquake. It causes just 
as much devastation.
  The problem is it kind of creeps up. And in the flow of its 
destructive force are many ruined lives, many lost businesses, many 
people who cannot make the mortgages on their farms and homes. It is 
time we have some coordinated effort to address these disasters. This 
legislation seeks to get that done.
  Before I talk about the particulars of my bill, however, I would like 
to spend a few minutes describing to my colleagues just how devastating 
a serious drought disaster can be. Unfortunately, my State of New 
Mexico can be used as a prime example of this devastation.
  Mr. President, water is everything in New Mexico. Ours is an arid 
State, and the rain and snowfall we receive in the spring and winter is 
literally a matter of life and death to our cities, towns, businesses, 
and environment. In 1995-96, however, precipitation levels were the 
lowest the had been in the 100 years that the State has been keeping 
such records. The results were nothing less than disastrous.
  For example, the drought decimated the State's agricultural 
community. Every single county in the State received disaster 
declarations from the USDA. Farmers in the southern part of the State 
were forced to go to water wells, depleting an already-taxed aquifer. 
And, in northeastern New Mexico, winter wheat crops failed for the 
first time in anyone's memory.
  The drought also destroyed forage for livestock producers, causing an 
industry already hit hard by high feed prices to hurt even more. In 
all, it was estimated that ranchers lost up to 85 percent of their 
capital.
  The drought had a catastrophic impact on New Mexico's forests. The 
Dome, Hondo, and Chino Wells fires were all sparked by the incredibly 
dry conditions brought on by the drought, and were exacerbated by the 
lack of water needed to extinguished them. In all, there were over 
1,200 fires in New Mexico last year burning over 140,000 acres of land 
and wiping out dozens of homes and businesses.
  The drought also caused municipal water systems to be taxed to the 
hilt, forcing many cities and towns to consider drastically raised 
water rates for their citizens. And the drought meant that critical 
stretches of the Rio Grande River were almost completely dry, which in 
turn meant vastly reduced amounts of water for wildlife such as the 
endangered silvery minnow.
  And New Mexico's problems were those of just one State: the 1995-96 
drought devastated the entire southwestern region. Arizona, California, 
Colorado, Nevada, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Kansas were all severely 
impacted by the drought. Small businessmen, farmers, and ranchers all 
across the area were wiped out. Oklahoma experienced almost $500 
million in agricultural losses alone. Texas's agricultural losses 
exceeded $2 billion, while its overall statewide losses were over $5 
billion. And in the southwest as a whole, almost 3 million acres of 
land were engulfed by fire, an amount almost three times the 5-year 
acreage.
  In short, Mr. President, this drought was a killer. We in the 
Southwest were fortunate that this year is proving to be a much better 
year for precipitation than the last. But we do not know what the next 
year will bring. There could be yet another drought, again sending 
towns scrambling to drill new water wells, sweeping fire across bone-
dry forests, and forcing farmers and ranchers to watch their way of 
life being wiped out.
  But I do not want to give the impression that severe droughts are 
solely the curse of the Southwest. Every region in the United States 
can be hit by these catastrophes. In 1976-77, a short but intense 
drought struck the Pacific Northwest, requiring the construction of 
numerous dams and reservoirs to secure millions of additional acre feet 
of needed water. The 1988 Midwest drought caused over $5 billion in 
losses. And the infamous 7-year drought of 1986-93 experienced by 
California, the Pacific Northwest, and the Great Basin States caused 
extensive damage to water systems, water quality, fish and wildlife, 
and recreational activities.
  And yet, even though they are so pervasive, and even though they so 
seriously impact the economic and environmental well-being of the 
entire Nation, we in New Mexico have learned from hard experience that 
the United States is poorly prepared to deal with serious drought 
emergencies. As a result of the hardships being suffered in every part 
of my state last year, I convened a special Multi-State Drought Task 
Force of Federal, State, local, and tribal emergency management 
agencies to coordinate efforts to respond to the drought. The task 
force was ably headed up by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
and included every Federal agency that has programs designed to deal 
with drought.
  Unfortunately, what the task force found was that although the 
Federal Government has numerous drought related programs on the books, 
there simply is no integrated, coordinated system of implementing those 
programs. For example, while most of the Federal drought programs 
require a person to apply proactively for relief under them, there was 
almost a total lack of knowledge about those programs on the part of 
the victims they were designed to help. Worse yet, the programs that 
are in place are fragmented and ad hoc, and stop well short

[[Page S755]]

of comprehensively helping people prepare for or respond to drought. 
Consequently, at first drought victims in this Nation do not know who 
to turn to for help, and then find that the help that is available is 
too late and totally inadequate.
  These fundamental problems were specifically identified by the Multi-
State Drought Task Force in its final report on the drought of 1995-96. 
The task force stated that ``[t]he States are left are left to navigate 
the ocean of applicable assistance programs as best they can.'' The 
task force went on to observe:

       The Federal government does not have a national drought 
     policy, national climatic monitoring system, nor an 
     institutionalized organizational structure to address 
     drought. Therefore, every time a drought occurs the Federal 
     government is behind the power curve playing catch up in an 
     ad hoc fashion to meet the needs of the impacted states and 
     their citizens.

  The Western Governors' Association recognized the exact same problems 
in its 1996 Drought Response Action Plan. The WGA stated that ``[t[he 
absence of a lead agency to handle drought--in addition to the lack of 
Federal interagency coordination--has significantly reduced the Federal 
Government's ability to provide adequate support over the long term.''
  Indeed, the Multi-State Drought Task Force recommended that 
``Congress in coordination with the administration develop and adopt a 
National Drought Policy to include a national drought monitory system 
and an institutionalized organizational structure with a designated 
lead Federal agency to direct and coordinate the efforts of the Federal 
Government in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from 
drought, as well as mitigating the impacts of drought.''
  Similarly, the Western Governors' Association recommends 
``[d]evelop[ing] a national drought policy or framework that integrates 
actions and responsibilities among all levels of government (Federal, 
State, regional, and local). This policy should plainly spell out 
preparedness, response, and mitigation measures to be provided by each 
entity.'' And it is my understanding that the National Governors' 
Association is considering adopting a similar recommendation sponsored 
by Governor Johnson of New Mexico.
  All of this, Mr. President, has led me to introduce today's 
legislation. I believe that my bill will be the first step toward 
finally establishing a coherent, effective national drought policy. My 
bill creates a commission comprised of representatives of those 
Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies and organizations which are 
most involved with drought issues. On the Federal side, the Commission 
will include representatives from USDA, Interior, the Army, FEMA, SBA, 
and Commerce--agencies which all currently have drought-related 
programs on the books. Equally important will be the nonfederal 
members, including representatives from the National Governors' 
Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and four persons 
representative of those groups that are always hardest hit by drought 
emergencies.
  The Commission will be charged with determining what needs exists on 
the Federal, State, local, and tribal levels with regard to drought; 
with reviewing existing Federal, State, local, and tribal drought 
programs; and with determining what gaps exist between the needs of 
drought victims and those programs currently designed to deal with 
drought.
  More importantly, the Commission will then be charged with making 
recommendations on how Federal drought laws and programs can be better 
integrated into a comprehensive national policy to mitigate the impacts 
of, and respond to, serious drought emergencies. Should Federal drought 
programs be consolidated under one single existing agency? How can the 
Nation be better prepared for these disasters? Should emergency loan 
programs that stand the risk of sinking drought victims deeper into 
debt be reevaluated? These are just some of the questions that we in 
Congress need guidance on if we are to move to the next level in 
developing a national drought strategy.
  In conclusion, Mr. President, my legislation is just the first step 
in addressing the major national problem of drought disasters, but it 
is a step that must be taken quickly. Drought can strike any State, at 
any time, for any duration. I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
                                 ______