[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 88 (Tuesday, June 28, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H5256-H5257]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           UPPER MISSISSIPPI PROJECT TO BE CONSIDERED IN WRDA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, the House Water Resources Development 
Act is on its way to the floor this week, perhaps as early as Thursday. 
In that bill, there is authorized a $1.8 billion expansion of lock work 
on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, despite three National Academy 
of Science reports concluding that realistic projections of the traffic 
that it is meant to

[[Page H5257]]

deal with do not justify it. This project epitomizes the need for 
reform and modernization of the Corps and for Congress to exercise its 
oversight role.
  In the year 2000, Corps economist Donald Sweeney filed for 
whistleblower protection after Corps leaders fired him when he claimed 
that Corps officials had ordered him to underestimate how much grain 
would be shipped to alternatives on the river. Two generals and a 
colonel ultimately lost their jobs after the Army Inspector General 
concluded that the Corps had indeed ``cooked the books''. Yet we have 
the project before us here today, an example still of the continuing 
problems of the Corps planning system where nonstructural alternatives 
such as congestion fees, scheduling and switch boats are ignored. This 
project demonstrates the need for independent review of huge Corps 
projects. If outside independent review had been applied in the 
beginning, we would have saved millions of dollars and decades on 
studies and we would not be arguing about it today.
  Make no mistake, every Member of Congress has a stake in this 
argument, because if we pass this project, it will take up 10 to 15 
percent of the entire Corps construction project for years to come. It 
will delay or eliminate funding for many worthwhile projects around the 
country when we currently have a $58 billion backlog of unfinished 
Corps projects and less than $2 billion a year to construct them.
  Each Member of Congress should ask, Is there a demand for this 
project? Is it worth the money? Are there cheaper alternatives?
  That demand issue is particularly important because this is a project 
to reduce river congestion on the upper Mississippi and Illinois 
Rivers. But according to the Corps' own data, barge traffic has 
declined 23 percent from 1992 to 2003. Last year it dropped 19 percent. 
Lock delays have significantly declined as well in recent years.
  The cost justification according to three National Academy of 
Sciences studies over the last 4 years and the Office of Management and 
Budget have questioned the methodology used in this project. In 2001, 
an NAS panel concluded the Corps had relied on overly optimistic barge 
forecasts for traffic. In December 2003, a second NAS panel reviewed 
the revised study and renewed their objections. Yet another NAS report 
came out in 2004 and concluded that, and I quote, the Corps has made 
substantial progress on the study in the past 3 years but the study 
contains serious flaws, serious enough to limit its credibility and 
value within the policymaking process.
  There are, in fact, cheaper alternatives. The National Academy of 
Science concluded in its 2004 report that nonstructural approaches for 
managing waterway traffic appear not to have been considered at all. 
Why should we go forward with a project on this scale until we have 
examined all the inexpensive, small scale congestion management 
measures that could be just as effective and make a much greater 
difference much quicker?
  Last but not least, it should be pointed out that we have been 
pouring money into the area for years. Over the last 15 years, the 
Corps has rehabilitated many of the locks they now plan to replace. 
They have spent over $900 million extending the productive lives of the 
existing locks and dams.
  People ought to take a very close look at this before it comes to the 
floor. As I mentioned, every Member has a stake in it. When you compare 
this to our overall water construction projects, it is actually five or 
six times larger than the ``Big Dig'' road project in Boston compared 
to our highway system.
  I plan to offer amendments with the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Flake) to make sure that if we go forward, that we do so with the 
proper assessment. We should not have political decisions take the 
place of economic analysis. We have to make sure we are funding 
legitimate projects, not politicizing the Corps.

                          ____________________