[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 60 (Thursday, April 23, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H4693-H4695]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1145, NATIONAL WATER RESEARCH AND 
                   DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE ACT OF 2009

  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 352 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 352

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1145) to implement a National Water Research 
     and Development Initiative, and for other purposes. The first 
     reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of 
     order against consideration of the bill are waived except 
     those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking 
     minority member of the Committee on Science and Technology. 
     After general debate the bill shall be considered for 
     amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to 
     consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment 
     under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute recommended by the Committee on Science and 
     Technology now printed in the bill. The committee amendment 
     in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. 
     All points of order against the committee amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute are waived except those arising under 
     clause 10 of rule XXI. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule 
     XVIII, no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature 
     of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the 
     order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member 
     designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall 
     be debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
     divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, 
     shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject 
     to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
     the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 
     amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 or 
     10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 
     bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 
     bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Lincoln Diaz-
Balart). All time yielded during consideration of the rule is for 
debate only.


                             General Leave

  Mr. ARCURI. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 
legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and to 
insert extraneous materials into the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. ARCURI. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H. Res. 352 provides for a structured rule for 
consideration of H.R. 1145, the National Water Research and Development 
Initiative Act of 2009.
  Among the many challenges we face, none is more elemental than 
protecting our water. Increases in population, growing energy demands 
and shifting weather patterns jeopardize water supplies across the 
country. Water is essential and irreplaceable, but many Americans are 
unaware that many supplies across the country are at risk.
  It is critical that we coordinate the efficient use of water 
resources and maintain water quality. Competent water management is 
essential if we are to meet the competing needs of transportation, 
industry, agriculture, recreation, and power production, but currently 
more than 20 Federal agencies carry out research and development on 
some aspect of water supply, water quality or water management.
  H.R. 1145 would address this issue by creating a National Water 
Research and Development Initiative to improve Federal, State and local 
government activities related to water research and development. The 
bill would improve coordination on Federal research by establishing an 
interagency committee to ensure Federal agencies work together on 
critical water issues.
  A lack of coordination and competing interests frequently strain 
agencies and local communities tasked with managing a limited water 
supply. A perfect example of this problem can be found in my district 
in Upstate New York, where the Hinckley Reservoir supplies water for 
130,000 residents in my hometown of Utica and for the outlying areas; 
but as with most bodies of water, the reservoir serves multiple uses, 
not just as a source of drinking water but as a source of hydropower 
and a water supply for the canal and a recreational site.
  After years of battle between the local water authority and the State 
canal corporation over rights to the water, a couple of summers ago, 
the Hinckley Reservoir drained to within 3 feet of disrupting the water 
supply. That was not because of a lack of water. That has never been 
the issue. Rather, it was the lack of a cogent water policy and 
agreement by the conflicting interests. The low reservoir level 
impacted hydropower generation at a local power facility, and it 
jeopardized drinking water safety. A situation like this is 
unacceptable, especially when there is a large amount of water 
available. It is critical that we put measures in place resolving the 
conflicting objectives and poor communication between agencies.
  This underlying bill and the water census it creates is the first 
step in that process for similar situations that exist, not only in New 
York State but around the country. That is why I'm offering an 
amendment that will require the interagency committee created by this 
bill to study competing water supply uses and how different uses 
interact and impact each other. Our water supply is invaluable in so 
many ways, not only for consumption but for the generation of 
electricity, for the production of food, for transportation, and for 
recreation, just to name a few. We must be sure to balance these 
competing interests in an efficient and equitable way.
  Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the National Water Research and 
Development Initiative Act. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle will continue to support it as well.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
thank my friend, the gentleman from

[[Page H4694]]

New York (Mr. Arcuri), for the time, and I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Water is the most essential and basic natural resource to sustain 
life. The single greatest factor that has contributed most to the 
spread of public health in the United States is access to clean water. 
Across the country, approximately 40 billion gallons of water are used 
each day for industrial purposes, for home landscaping, for personal 
hygiene, for thirst, and for many other uses. The average American uses 
about 100 gallons of water per day.
  As our cities and communities continue to expand, one of the greatest 
challenges faced by local governments is finding ways to sustain 
adequate clean water supplies to meet the growing demand. However, our 
knowledge about water resources and conservation is based on research 
conducted in the middle of the last century. The underlying legislation 
being brought to the floor now, the National Water Research and 
Development Initiative Act, will help bring our knowledge of water 
resources into this century by coordinating national research and 
development efforts to ensure adequate water supplies through greater 
efficiency and conservation programs.
  Specifically, the bill establishes an interagency committee to 
develop a national water research and assessment plan in coordination 
with State, local and tribal governments, and it will also coordinate 
all research development data and other activities related to water, 
and it will ensure the optimal use of resources and expertise by 
avoiding duplicity through better intergovernmental cooperation.
  I had the privilege during the last district work period of meeting 
with constituents throughout my district about issues that matter to 
them. No one mentioned anything related to this bill. It's an important 
bill; it's an important issue, but there are other issues that are much 
more pressing, issues that, I think, we should be debating, instead of 
spending an entire week on a water bill that enjoys absolute consensus, 
bipartisan support in this Congress. We should be working on issues 
that really matter the most to our constituents--the pressing and 
critical issues Americans deal with on a daily basis. For example, we 
could be working to help the people of our great Nation to rebuild 
their retirement, college and personal savings accounts.
  Earlier this week, the Inspector General of the Treasury Department 
released a report confirming the lack of oversight and accounting of 
taxpayer money in the TARP program. By the way, in my almost 17 years 
here, Mr. Speaker, there is no vote that I'm happier to have cast a 
``no'' on than for that of the TARP program. I knew the future would be 
lined with scandal. Less than one-half of 1 percent of that TARP 
program has gone to the State that I'm honored to represent, really 
Ground Zero in the housing crisis, Florida. Less than one-half of 1 
percent. Wall Street was more than taken care of. Yet, troubled assets, 
that was what we were told was the purpose of that legislation, 
troubled assets recovery. I don't think one troubled asset has been 
purchased.

                              {time}  1030

  Those are the kinds of issues we should be dealing with.
  So the question I would ask you, why doesn't the majority address 
those critical issues? For example, bring forth legislation to increase 
transparency in that TARP program.
  Water is an important issue, but we could bring it here summarily on 
suspension. It doesn't need to take a week of the precious time of this 
Congress.
  By the time we finish debating this rule, Mr. Speaker--there is a 
clock there over your head and we see the minutes passing--the Federal 
Government will have spent over $400 million just during the minutes 
that have ticked during this debate. That's four times what President 
Obama has asked his Cabinet to cut earlier this week. We could have 
spent this time helping cut Federal waste and reducing the debt being 
piled on our children and their children. It's another example of the 
issues that we should be debating in this Congress.
  Yet, instead of addressing the challenges that confront the American 
people, the majority has chosen to devote precious floor time and, in 
effect, to take an entire congressional week to consider a 
noncontroversial water bill. That's the way this majority has chosen to 
run Congress.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from the Rules 
Committee for his passionate statement, but I have to disagree with 
respect to talking about water as an issue that isn't as important as 
other issues.
  Clearly, we have many important issues facing this country, but in 
the past 2 weeks that I was home, I did 11 town hall meetings, and I 
can tell you that water came up in every single town hall meeting, 
whether it was ensuring that the water purity, the ground water purity 
was safe in the southern part of my district where they are doing 
hydraulic fracking for natural gas in the shale or whether it is using 
excessive amounts in hydro plants with the Hinckley Dam that I just 
spoke of, or whether it is lowering the level of Seneca Lake to feed 
hydro plants in the Finger Lakes.
  People are concerned. And I would submit that other needs and other 
uses of water are very important. Other things that we do here in 
Congress are critically important, but nothing is more important than 
keeping the water that we drink clean and fresh. That is the number one 
resource of our country, that is the most important thing that we, as a 
Nation, have, and that is keeping our water supply clean. People talk 
about how important oil is, and clearly it is. But water is, without a 
doubt, the most important commodity, resource that we have. We can't 
live without water, and, therefore, it is the most important thing.
  I have already discussed the competing uses of hydro recreation and 
economic development and water use in my district in one end of it. But 
as I said, there are other parts of my district, as well, and the 
Finger Lakes region that are very concerning.
  Seneca Lake is the second deepest lake in North America, yet they 
still encounter safety concerns because the lake levels are going down. 
Now, not only is that important again for recreation, for hydropower, 
for water use, for drinking water use, but the level of the lake is 
going down. It's the water source for the Seneca Falls Power Company. 
It's located on the Seneca-Cayuga Canal. And at this point, 1 inch of 
the lake level of Seneca Lake is roughly about 1.2 billion gallons of 
water, and yet the lake level is down several inches. A number of 
different State and Federal agencies are involved in the management of 
the water at Seneca Lake, and yet no one can come together on what the 
cause is and how to regulate the amount of outflow from the lake.
  What is amazing is we have all of these competing uses for a finite 
amount of water, and yet the agencies that oversee these uses act more 
like competitors rather than competitive stewards of a very scarce 
resource.
  We need this bill to study how using water for one of these purposes 
impacts or limits the use of other purposes. That is what is critical. 
There is nothing more important than our good stewardship of our 
resource of water.
  Seneca Lake, Hinckley Reservoir, two issues in my district alone, and 
that's just one small congressional district. There are 435 in the 
country, all with similar issues. To maximize the benefits, we need to 
make sure we are using the water in the best way. And therefore, Mr. 
Speaker, I think that it is necessary that we pass this rule and the 
underlying bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I reiterate, water 
is important, but to have taken an entire week of congressional time on 
this bill when the American people are facing so many challenges is not 
appropriate.
  At this time, I yield 4 minutes to my distinguished colleague, the 
great leader in this Congress from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule and this legislation 
as well, the National Water Resource and Development Initiative Act.
  As a Representative of Michigan, the Great Lakes State, water issues 
of all varieties are very important to all of my constituents. The 
Great Lakes are fully one-fifth, or 20 percent, of the

[[Page H4695]]

world's freshwater drinking supply, and certainly that makes them a 
natural resource unparalleled on the planet.
  This legislation, which would establish a national committee to study 
our Nation's water needs and to make recommendations for a 
comprehensive national water strategy, sounds very good and very 
noncontroversial at first blush. But whenever a national water policy 
is first discussed, we in Michigan and the Great Lakes Basin get very 
nervous. And whether it is due to population expansion and to dryer 
areas of the Nation in the South or the West or global warming or 
whatever, water is going to be a very important need for many in the 
21st century.
  In fact, just last year, Mr. Speaker, Business Week magazine did a 
cover story about why the great oilman T. Boone Pickens thinks water is 
actually the new oil. As a result of these challenges, some have begun 
to promote the idea of a natural water policy to deal with these 
challenges, and attention will undoubtedly turn to the places that have 
freshwater like the Great Lakes. There have been numerous examples of 
this over the decades on both sides of the aisle here. But let me 
illustrate a recent one.
  During the 2008 Presidential campaign, New Mexico Governor Bill 
Richardson, who was then running for President, told the Las Vegas Sun, 
``I want a national water policy. We need a dialogue between the States 
to deal with issues like water conservation, water reuse technology, 
water delivery, and water production.'' And he went on to say, ``States 
like Wisconsin are awash with water.''
  Fortunately, in order to prevent efforts by others to divert Great 
Lakes water outside the Basin, last fall we enacted the Great Lakes 
Compact, which reserves for the Governors of the Great Lakes States the 
opportunity to regulate diversions of water from the Great Lakes Basin. 
The compact bans new and increased diversions of water outside the 
Great Lakes Basin with only limited, highly regulated exceptions, and 
it establishes a framework for each State and the two provinces in 
Canada to enact laws protecting the Basin. And after being ratified by 
the Great Lakes State, the compact passed this House last September by 
a vote of 390-25, and the Senate actually passed it under unanimous 
consent, was then signed into law by then-President Bush.
  In order to ensure that this new water initiative does not infringe 
on the principles associated with the Great Lakes Compact, I offered an 
amendment to the Rules Committee yesterday. Regrettably, it was not 
made in order. Quite simply, my amendment would have prevented the 
interagency committee, the National Water Initiative Coordination 
Office, the National Water Research and Assessment Plan from 
considering or promoting policies that would undermine or interfere 
with the principles of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin Water 
Resources Compact.
  The Great Lakes, as I said, are the very identity of my State of 
Michigan and all of us in the Great Lakes Basin, and we all take their 
care very seriously. My constituents will not abide even the prospect 
of a diversion of the Great Lakes water to other areas of the country 
where growth is beginning to outstrip their resources. And some might 
argue that the Great Lakes Compact provides all of the protections that 
we need.
  I do agree that there are very strong protections in the compact, but 
I also fear that everything is subject to change. And while I am not 
suggesting that this legislation aims to divert Great Lakes water, it 
also does nothing to protect them or to protect and prohibit diversion 
either. Such protections would make, certainly, my constituents and all 
the people that live in the Great Lakes Basin much more comfortable 
with the establishment of a national water policy. And since those 
protections are not included in this legislation, Mr. Speaker, I will 
be opposing both this rule and the bill.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlelady from Michigan for her 
insightful comments and certainly her strong leadership on protecting 
what I believe to be the greatest natural resource not only in America 
but also in North America and our water supply.
  I would inquire if the other side has any other speakers.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. No, we do not.
  I thank my friend for the handling of the rule on this important 
matter.
  Mr. Speaker, I would simply reiterate that while this issue is of 
great importance, there are many other issues facing this Nation, and 
for this entire week for this Congress to have done nothing else during 
this entire week is really unfortunate and it shows the manner in which 
the majority of this Congress, the leadership of the majority of this 
Congress is running this Congress, and the American people are finding 
out. They are discovering it.
  We have no further speakers. At this time, I yield back the balance 
of our time.
  Mr. ARCURI. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Florida (Mr. Lincoln 
Diaz-Balart) for his management of this rule.
  Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would like to thank Chairman Gordon for 
working to bring this important piece of legislation to the floor. As I 
said earlier, there really is nothing more important or elemental than 
our water and our water supply. We must manage it wisely. There is just 
too much at stake if we do not. I believe this bill is going to go a 
long way towards improving the way we manage our most precious natural 
resource and ensure that it is clean, safe, and abundant for future 
generations.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on the previous question and on the rule.
  I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question 
on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________