[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 106 (Tuesday, September 12, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8419-S8420]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. TORRICELLI:
  S. 3036. A bill to assure that recreation and other economic benefits 
are accorded the same weight as hurricane and storm damage reduction 
benefits as well as environmental restoration benefits; to the 
Committee on Environment and Public Works.


                     national beach enhancement act

  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
which will ensure the preservation of our nation's coastal areas. 
Protection of our beaches is paramount; they are not only where we go 
to enjoy the sand and surf, but they also generate a significant 
portion of our nation's revenue.
  Tourism and recreational activity are extremely important to New 
Jersey, especially to our small businesses and shore communities. New 
Jersey's $17 billion a year tourism industry is supported by the 160 
million people who visit our 127 miles of beaches each year. This 
spending by tourists totaled $26.1 billion in New Jersey in 1998, a 2 
percent increase from $25.6 billion in 1997.
  My state is a microcosm of coastal tourism throughout the United 
States. Travel and tourism is our Nation's largest industry, employer, 
and foreign-revenue earner, and U.S. beaches are its leading tourist 
destination. In 1997, total tourism expenditures in U.S. coastal areas 
was over $185 billion, generating over 2.7 million jobs with a payroll 
of nearly $50 million.
  Americans are not the only ones eager to enjoy our beaches and 
coastal regions. They are also the top destination for foreign 
tourists. Each year, the U.S. takes in $4 billion in taxes from foreign 
tourists, while state and local governments receive another $3.5 
million.
  In Florida alone, foreign tourists spent over $11 billion in 1992, $2 
billion of that amount in the Miami Beach area. This Florida spending 
generated over $750 million in Federal tax revenues. A recent article 
by Dr. James R.

[[Page S8420]]

Houston, published in the American Shore and Beach Preservation 
Journal, shows that annual tax revenues from foreign tourists in Miami 
Beach are 17 times more than the Federal government spent on the entire 
Federal Shore Protection program from 1950 to 1993. If the Federal 
share of beach nourishment averages about $10 million a year, the 
Federal government collects about 75 times more in taxes from foreign 
tourists in Florida than it spends restoring that State's beaches.
  Delaware, one of the smallest states in the Union, is visited by over 
5 million people each year. This, in a state where just over 21,000 
people actually live in beach communities and another 373,000 live 
within a several hours drive. Beach tourism generates over $173 million 
in expenditures each year for ``The First State.''
  Equally significant, however, beach erosion results in an estimated 
loss of over 471,000 visitor days a year, a figure which is estimated 
to increase to over 516,000 after five years. A 1998 study by Jack 
Faucett Associates (Bethesda, MD) in cooperation with independent 
consultants for the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and 
Environmental Control shows that during this five-year period, beach 
erosion will cost an estimated $30.2 million in consumer expenditures, 
the loss of 625 beach area jobs, and the reduction of wages and 
salaries by $11.5 million. Business profits will drop by $1.6 million 
and State and local tax revenues will decrease by $2.3 million. 
Finally, beach erosion will reduce beach area property values by nearly 
$43 million. The situation in Delaware is indicative of beach erosion 
problems throughout the coastlines of our nation. Unless we increase 
our efforts to protect and re-nourish our coastline, we jeopardize a 
significant portion of our country's revenue.
  The Federal government spends $100 million a year for the Federal 
Shore Protection program. While the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does a 
benefit-cost analysis in connection with every shore protection 
project, that analysis suffers from its own myopia. It places its 
greatest emphasis on the value of the private property that is 
immediately adjacent to the coastline. It is not reasonable to assume 
that a healthy beach with natural dunes and vegetation will benefit 
only that first row of homes and businesses. Homeowners spend money in 
the region; hotels attract tourists, who also spend money; local 
residents who live inland come to the beach to recreate. They too, 
spend money. Countless businesses, from t-shirt vendors to restaurants, 
all depend on these expenditures.
  Prior to the 1986 Water Resources Development Act, the Army Corps of 
Engineers viewed recreation as an equally important component of its 
cost-benefits analysis. However, the 1986 bill omitted recreation as 
benefit to be considered, and our coastal communities have suffered. 
Indeed, the economy of our nation has suffered. My legislation would 
make it clear that recreational benefits will be given the same 
budgetary priority as storm damage reduction and environmental 
restoration. Companion legislation has been introduced in the House of 
Representatives, by Congressmen Lampson and LoBiondo, and enjoys 
bipartisan support.
  Beach replenishment efforts ensure that our beaches are protected, 
property is not damaged, dunes are not washed away, and the resource 
that coastal towns rely on for their lifeblood, is preserved. It is 
imperative that federal policy base beach nourishment assistance on the 
entirety of the economic benefits it provides. To limit benefits to 
hurricane or storm damage reduction ignores the equally important 
economic impact of tourism.
                                 ______