[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[House]
[Pages 23148-23151]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2003

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 375 and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 375

       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. 2557) to provide for the conservation and 
     development of water and related resources, to authorize the 
     Secretary of the Army to construct various projects for 
     improvements to rivers and harbors of the United States, and 
     for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be 
     dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the bill 
     and shall not exceed one

[[Page 23149]]

     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure. 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 
     Transportation and Infrastructure 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. 
     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. 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 (Mr. LaHood). The gentleman from Washington 
(Mr. Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate 
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as 
I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time 
yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 375 is a structured rule providing for 
the consideration of H.R. 2557, the Water Resources Development Act of 
2003. The rule provides for 1 hour of general debate to be equally 
divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
  The rule provides that the amendments in the nature of a substitute, 
recommended by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, now 
printed in the bill shall be considered as the original bill for the 
purpose of amendments and shall be considered as read. The rule also 
waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute. Furthermore, the rule makes in order only those 
amendments printed in the Committee on Rules report accompanying this 
resolution. It provides that the amendments printed in the report shall 
be considered 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 a proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment and shall not be subject to a demand for a 
division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.
  Finally, the rule waives all points of order against the amendments 
printed in the report and provides for one motion to recommit, with or 
without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2557 is a bill providing for the conservation and 
development of water and related resources and authorizing the 
Secretary of the Army to construct various projects to improve rivers 
and harbors in the United States, and for other purposes.
  The bill establishes a traditional 2-year cycle of congressional 
action to authorize, modify and improve the projects, programs and 
policies of the Corps of Engineers. It authorizes 13 ``Chiefs Reports'' 
on Federal flood damage reduction, navigation, hurricane and storm 
damage reduction and environmental restoration.
  It should be noted, Mr. Speaker, that this bill includes provisions 
for streamlining and expediting Corps of Engineers project delivery and 
permits. It also reflects an important consensus agreement on peer 
review of Corps of Engineers projects.
  I am particularly pleased, Mr. Speaker, that the committee has 
included in the manager's amendment, language permitting the Corps of 
Engineers employees working at dams in the Pacific Northwest, my area, 
to participate in wage surveys that are conducted to determine their 
rate of pay. This important provision would allow these employees the 
same participation allowed similar employees at dams in the region 
operated by the Bonneville Power Administration and the Bureau of 
Reclamation. I appreciate the committee's consideration of my request 
on this matter.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that 
implementing H.R. 2557 would cost $2.6 billion over the 2004-2008 
period and an additional $2.1 billion over the following 10 years. In 
addition, the CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2557 would increase 
direct spending by $17 billion from the 2004 to 2008 period and by $32 
billion through 2013.
  H.R. 2557 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. Federal participation in 
water resources projects and programs authorized by this bill would 
benefit State, local and tribal governments, and any costs incurred by 
those governments to comply with the conditions of this Federal 
assistance would be entirely voluntary.
  With broad bipartisan support, this bill was reported favorably to 
the House on July 23 by voice vote. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker, I urge my 
colleagues to support both H.R. 2557 and the underlying rule.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to support the passage of H.R. 2557, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2003, and want to begin by thanking 
and congratulating my colleagues, the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman 
Young) and the ranking member, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Oberstar) of the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
as well as the gentleman from Tennessee (Chairman Duncan) and the 
ranking member, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) on the 
Subcommittee of Water Resources and Environment for their hard work on 
this legislation.
  This bill is the result of thoughtful bipartisan cooperation which is 
clearly evident in the final product. These colleagues and the 
committee staff deserve a tremendous amount of credit for tackling some 
difficult issues in this legislation, not the least of which is the 
reform of the Army Corps of Engineers project review process.
  H.R. 2557 reauthorizes the 1986 Water Resources Development Act for 
the Civil Works Program for the Army Corps of Engineers.

                              {time}  1600

  The bill authorizes funding for a number of vitally important water 
resource development programs, studies and projects all across this 
country.
  The Congressional Budget Office estimates the total outlays 
authorized by the bill for 2004 to 2008 to be $2.6 billion, with an 
additional $2.1 billion over the 10 years after fiscal year 2008. CBO 
also estimates that the Water Resources Development Act of 2003 will 
increase direct spending by $17 million over the period of fiscal year 
2004 through fiscal year 2008.
  Mr. Speaker, the Army Corps of Engineers is a unique Federal agency 
in that it performs a broad range of both military and civilian duties. 
The Corps' civilian duties have traditionally included the construction 
and maintenance of passable channels and flood control. However, 
Congress expanded these responsibilities in the early 1990s to add 
beach erosion control, ecosystem protection, disaster relief, and other 
activities to their charge.

[[Page 23150]]

  Today the Corps maintains more than 11,000 miles of channels for 
commercial navigation, 300 deep commercial harbors and 600 shallow 
inland harbors. The Corps also manages 33 major lakes and reservoirs 
and 8,500 miles of levees for flood control. Perhaps lesser known, but 
equally as important, is the fact that there are 75 hydropower plants 
at Army Corps facilities that are responsible for producing 
approximately one-quarter of the Nation's electricity.
  Mr. Speaker, my home State of Massachusetts is a State with an 
abundance of navigable rivers, harbors, lakes and coastline, and I am 
especially grateful for the work performed by the Army Corps of 
Engineers. However, I believe the reforms to the Corps' project review 
and approval process adopted in this bill are not only necessary, but 
will serve to strengthen the Corps' capabilities.
  By establishing an independent peer review system under the direction 
of the National Academy of Sciences, this legislation ensures that 
Corps projects will satisfy acceptable economic and environmental 
standards. The peer review system applies only to projects estimated to 
cost $50 million or more, which represents roughly 30 percent of all 
Corps projects. The bill also provides sufficient flexibility and 
discretion for the Corps to exempt noncontroversial projects from the 
review process. This is critically important so that the Corps can move 
quickly on projects that do not have an adverse impact.
  The Water Resources Development Act of 2003 also embraces a number of 
other important reforms to improve the coordination of environmental 
reviews and enhance the Corps' ability to work cooperatively with non-
Federal partners. I am especially pleased that this legislation 
recognizes the need for the Federal Government to do more for local 
communities by substantially increasing the Federal cost share for deep 
harbor dredging to 65 percent and 100 percent for long-term 
maintenance. This is welcome news to States and other non-Federal 
partners that are struggling in this economy to leverage the match for 
these projects.
  Mr. Speaker, although the underlying bill is good, and it is a 
bipartisan project, I personally wish we were considering this bill 
under an open rule. The majority leader has already cancelled votes on 
Mondays and has informed this body that it is unlikely there will be 
votes on Fridays during the entire month of September. It is clear that 
we have time to consider thoughtful bills like the Water Resources 
Development Act under an open rule. Yet the Republican leadership 
continues to close the democratic process by reporting restrictive 
rules that only make in order a handful of amendments.
  While the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Subcommittee on Water 
Resources and Environment worked with a number of Members, including 
myself, on a variety of issues, not every issue was addressed by the 
manager's amendment. A number of thoughtful amendments were brought 
before the Committee on Rules, requesting waivers for their 
consideration by this body. While the rule does make in order three 
amendments, the manager's amendment and one amendment each from 
majority and minority, other amendments were not made in order.
  One of these amendments was offered by the gentlewoman from Michigan 
(Mrs. Miller). Her amendment would have directed the Department of 
Transportation to develop regulations to reduce the amount of invasive 
species that enter the Great Lakes on the cargo ships that travel 
throughout the region. This is a critically important issue the 
gentlewoman made clear to the Committee on Rules last night. Her 
amendment was thoughtful, and I am disappointed that this body will not 
have the opportunity to debate and vote on it.
  However, the underlying bill, the Water Resources Development Act, 
demonstrates our collective commitment to addressing water resource 
needs nationally, and it reaffirms our confidence in the Army Corps of 
Engineers. It was written and considered in a bipartisan fashion, and 
it deserves the support of every Member of this body.
  Once again, I commend the work of the members of the committee, 
specifically the chairman and the ranking member, on this bill, and I 
urge my colleagues to support its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan).
  Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Speaker, I will not take 2 minutes, but I rise in 
strong support of the rule for consideration of H.R. 2557, the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2003. This is a good rule and a good bill. 
All amendments that were submitted were submitted in a timely manner 
and were germane and made in order.
  The reason I rise is to take just a moment to say that there are few 
amendments because the committee worked hard to address Members' needs 
in the bill and in the manager's amendment.
  I just wanted to commend the staff on both sides for their hard work 
and long hours that they put in on this bill because, in many cases, 
groups and Members and staff started out far apart on many 
controversial issues, but this bill became a real effort and the best 
of bipartisanship, and we ended up with a very good bill that has flood 
control and environmental restoration projects, navigation projects, 
water conservation, recreation and dam safety projects.
  So I just wanted to say that I want to commend the Members who worked 
so hard on this bill, particularly the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Costello), the ranking member, and the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. 
Young) our chairman, and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), 
the ranking member, but especially I wanted to say a word about the 
hard work and long hours that the staff put in on this to resolve many 
of the very controversial issues, and I also want to thank the 
Committee on Rules for giving us this time and a good rule here, and I 
urge support of this rule.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Before I yield back my time, I again want to thank the gentleman from 
Alaska (Chairman Young), and the gentleman from Minnesota (Ranking 
Member Oberstar), and the gentleman from Tennessee (Chairman Duncan), 
and the gentleman from Illinois (Ranking Member Costello), and the 
staff of the full Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for 
all their work on this bill. This is a good bill, and it deserves to be 
passed.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Rohrabacher).
  Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this rule 
and support of the legislation as well, and I would hope, first of all, 
to congratulate all of those in leadership who have been involved in 
this. Water issues are so important, and they are also hard to work out 
at times, and I know the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) has put a 
lot of time and effort into this, as well as all of those on the 
committee.
  I especially am, of course, supportive of this rule because it makes 
in order an amendment that I have to this bill that I believe is 
vitally important to the security of our country and to the American 
taxpayers. The amendment that I will be offering, and I would hope that 
my fellow colleagues would consider this very deeply when it comes to 
the floor, it permits the ports around the United States, does not 
mandate them, but permits them to put a fee on containers coming in or 
out of the port, up to $100 per container.
  As we move forward with an incredibly expensive goal of modernizing 
our ports so they will be secure and safe, there is going to be this 
astronomical cost to accomplishing this goal. The ports themselves do 
not have the revenue resources necessary to do their part unless we 
give them a source of revenue. Many of the ports are going to

[[Page 23151]]

complain, and I understand that some of the ports have actually 
complained that they do not want the power to even ask for a fee from 
those people who are using the port facilities, the manufacturers 
overseas who are using the port facilities to send their containers in 
and out of the port.
  The American people should not have to pick up the entire burden that 
is required to make our ports safe and to keep our ports functioning in 
a way. My bill would make sure the people overseas pay their part as 
well and are able to do so through a fee on the containers coming 
through the ports.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California (Mr. Filner), a member of the Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
  Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. McGovern) for yielding me the time, and I rise today in support 
obviously of the rule, but also of the underlying bill, and especially 
the manager's amendment which the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) 
will bring up later which authorizes a water-related infrastructure 
project of great interest and need in my district and to my 
constituents in Imperial County, California.
  The New River, and that is the name of the river we are dealing with, 
the New River has been described as the world's worst polluted river. 
The river flows from Mexico north across the U.S. border and through my 
district in southern California. Due to grossly inadequate sewage 
treatment and solid waste facilities in Mexico, raw sewage, industrial 
waste and garbage are constantly released into the New River, hundreds 
of millions of gallons of raw sewage in the New River every year.
  It is extremely polluted. It is foamy, foul-smelling. A person would 
not want their children to play anywhere near this river. It violates 
water quality standards, and plants and animals cannot survive in much 
of the river. It continues to threaten the health of the residents of 
my district and even of undocumented immigrants who use the waterway to 
try to cross the international border.
  A coalition of citizen groups and government agencies in my district, 
including the Calexico New River Committee, has developed a feasible 
plan that will significantly improve the quality of water that flows 
through this community. They need to be supported, and this bill, which 
authorizes the Nation's water-related projects, would authorize $10 
million to make sanitation improvements to this river. It is an 
extremely important first step in the process in enhancing the water 
quality of the New River, enriching life in our community and making a 
healthier home not only for the human beings, but for fish and 
wildlife.
  So for the sake of my constituents at the U.S.-Mexico border, I urge 
my colleagues to support the manager's amendment and pass this bill.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, 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.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Pursuant to 
House Resolution 375 and rule XVIII, the Chair declares the House in 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the 
consideration of the bill, H.R. 2557.

                          ____________________