[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 50 (Tuesday, April 13, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H1869-H1870]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           WATER VISION 2000

  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, since I was elected to Congress I have 
been focusing on the issue of livable communities and how we create 
better partnerships between the Federal Government and our citizens.
  The livability movement is gaining dramatic momentum nationally as we 
watch officials from the Vice President, Mr. Gore, to local city and 
county commissioners champion goals for easing traffic congestion, 
promoting urban redevelopment and creating more open and green spaces. 
We have seen fundamental changes in how the Federal Government is 
approaching transportation once we acknowledged that trying to pave our 
way out of congestion simply did not work, and just as the ISTEA 
legislation and the recently-enacted TEA-21 are promoting innovative 
approaches to transportation problems, I suggest that it is time for us 
to take a new approach to how we manage water resources. It would begin 
with a vision and a framework for improving the way the Federal 
Government approaches water resource problems and management based on 
the same flexibility that we have seen in transportation.
  For too long, Mr. Speaker, we have treated our watersheds and rivers 
as machines, costing taxpayers billions of dollars as our communities 
continue to face increased risks from flood, decreasing numbers of fish 
and growing health risks caused by polluted rivers and streams. Forty 
percent of our Nation's waterways fail to meet drinking, recreation or 
fish habitat needs, and that number sadly is growing. Some urban 
streams and creeks and rivers are so degraded, people consider them 
dead and beyond recovery.
  Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I joined with the America's Rivers program to 
announce America's most endangered rivers of 1999, a list of 10 such 
threatened waterways and what we can do about it. Well, Congress can 
help right now, and I suggest that we approach water issues in this 
session with what I would term Water Vision 2000.
  It would, first of all, suggest that the Federal Government deal 
fundamentally with watersheds. We must think more broadly and 
comprehensively about the missions and how they can work with local 
communities throughout the entire watershed cycle.
  Second, we must focus on increased Federal flexibility. We need more 
coordination and responsiveness from Federal agencies so local 
communities can be creative in how they meet their water challenges. In 
this way we can indeed make sure that we are spending each dollar two 
or three times over in terms of total benefit, and citizen involvement 
must be part of the solution and not simply an afterthought of the 
decision-making process.
  We have been using such an approach in Oregon. Last November we 
brought together over 300 people to deal with a summit on the needs of 
the Johnson Creek watershed, 54 square miles, to consider 45 separate 
plans that exist to deal with land use and regulatory issues in this 
area. It was a beginning for our efforts to deal more comprehensively 
and creatively together from the Federal level down to the local area.
  I have suggested in this Congress three additional legislative 
proposals. I have already discussed on this floor approaches to the 
Federal flood control program. I hope ultimately we will have municipal 
watershed management on Federal lands; and I hope that people will join 
with me this week in dealing with reforms to the National Flood 
Insurance Program. High-risk properties for flood insurance right now 
make up only 2 percent of all the national flood properties, but they 
claim 40 percent of all Federal flood insurance pay-outs. Over the last 
18 years, repetitive losses from these properties have cost the 
taxpayers over $2.5 billion.
  My legislation would deny national Federal flood insurance coverage 
to people who file two or more claims that total more than the value of 
their property. It would suggest that people who refuse to use Federal 
money to take the precaution of flood-proofing their homes or 
relocating out of harm's way would no longer be entitled to continuous 
Federal payment. Now is the time that we in this Congress ought to 
dedicate our efforts at every turn to make sure that the numerous local 
and

[[Page H1870]]

Federal water agencies are working comprehensively in the watershed, 
Mr. Speaker.
  The next great advance in livability, if my colleagues will pardon 
the expression, is to be found on the waterfront, and I call on my 
colleagues to join me in this Congress in a comprehensive approach to a 
new vision of water resources.

                          ____________________