[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 18 (Tuesday, January 30, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E220-E221]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  WATER QUALITY FINANCING ACT OF 2007

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 30, 2007

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, in 1972, the passage of the Clean Water 
Act secured the nation's commitment to rescuing our waters and 
expelling the pollutants that were killing our water supply and the 
wildlife that depended on it. Today, Mr. Young, former Chairman of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Ms. Eddie Bernice 
Johnson, Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment, Congresswoman Ellen Tauscher, and I introduce bipartisan 
legislation that definitively renews our commitment to these waters and 
authorizes increased funding for wastewater infrastructure through a 
reauthorization of the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund program.
  The Water Quality Financing Act of 2007 authorizes $20 billion in 
Federal grants over five years to capitalize Clean Water State 
Revolving Funds. These funds provide low interest loans to communities 
for wastewater infrastructure. This bill also provides additional 
subsidies, including principal forgiveness and negative interest loans 
for communities that meet a state's affordability criteria, for 
individual ratepayers that will experience significant hardship from 
potential rate increases, and for the construction and implementation 
of innovative or alternative processes, materials, or technologies to 
meet the nation's wastewater treatment needs. It encourages long-term 
asset management planning and fInancing that will ensure sustainable 
systems and the potential to reduce overall capital and operation and 
maintenance costs and it promotes communities to consider alternative 
and innovative processes, materials, and technologies (including 
``green infrastructure'') that

[[Page E221]]

provide greater environmental benefIts, or the same benefIts using less 
energy or at a reduced cost. Water quality benefIts are the primary 
criterion for determining which projects receive funding, and 
encourages watershed approaches to solving water quality problems, as 
well as traditional infrastructure.
  Since 1972, the federal government has provided more than $82 billion 
for wastewater infrastructure and other assistance. Overall investment 
in the nation's infrastructure--including that from federal, state, and 
local sources--has been over $250 billion.
  Today, twice as many waters are considered fishable and swimmable as 
they were before the Clean Water Act was passed into law. Our 
infrastructure systems include 16,000 publicly owned wastewater 
treatment plants, 100,000 major pumping stations, 600,000 miles of 
sanitary sewers, and 200,000 miles of storm sewers. Toxic chemicals and 
other pollutants have been greatly reduced. Wildlife has returned in 
abundance to waters that were once declared ``dead''. One in ten 
tourists is destined for the beach--providing our travel and vacation 
industries with customers and business.
  Many of these success stories have occurred, in part, because of a 
strong commitment to fund necessary projects to improve water quality. 
Title VI of the Clean Water Act provides for the establishment and 
capitalization of Clean Water State Revolving Loan Funds (``Clean Water 
SRFs'') to aid in funding the construction of wastewater treatment 
works and other wastewater infrastructure around the country. Since 
1987, individual states and territories have maintained Clean Water 
SRFs to help provide for low-cost financing for approved water quality 
infrastructure projects.
  These advances aside, one-third of our nation's waters are still in 
deplorable condition. Although federal funding of Clean Water SRFs had 
been steady at a level of $1.35 billion annually, in recent years, 
funding for the program has been cut dramatically. From just fiscal 
year 2006 to fiscal year 2007, the administration's budget request for 
Clean Water SRFs decreased $199.2 million, dropping from $886.7 million 
to $687.5 million.
  These declines come at a time when funding is vital for progress. Our 
population is booming, putting more pressure on already over-burdened 
systems. In addition, much of the wastewater infrastructure in this 
country is rapidly approaching or has already exceeded its projected 
useful life. These antiquated systems need maintenance and rebuilding 
to protect our physical, economic, and natural environments.
  Without increased investment in wastewater infrastructure, in less 
than a generation, the U.S. could lose much of the gains it made thus 
far in improving water quality as a result of the 1972 Clean Water Act.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bipartisan bill, to continue 
funding our infrastructure, to make repairs where maintenance is 
needed, and to renew our commitment to our nation's waters.

                          ____________________