[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 5909-5910]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, yesterday I introduced, along with Senators 
Inhofe, Vitter, Warner, Voinovich, Isakson, Thune, Murkowski, Obama, 
Landrieu, Grassley, Harkin, Talent, Cornyn, Cochran, Domenici and 
Coleman, the 2005 Water Resources Development Act, S. 728.
  The programs administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are 
invaluable to this Nation. They provide drinking water, electric power 
production, river transportation, environmental protection and 
restoration, protection from floods, emergency response, and 
recreation.
  Few agencies in the Federal Government touch so many citizens, and 
with such little recognition by many, I might add, and they do it on a 
relatively small budget. They provide one-quarter of our Nation's total 
hydropower output, operate 456 lakes in 43 States, hosting 33 percent 
of all freshwater lake fishing. They facilitate the movement of 630 
million tons of cargo valued at over $73 billion annually through our 
inland system. They manage over 12 million acres of land and water; 
provide 3 trillion gallons of water for use by local communities and 
businesses; and they have provided an estimated $706 billion in flood 
damage within the past 25 years with an investment one-seventh of that 
value.
  During the 1993 flood alone, an experience which I witnessed 
firsthand, an estimated $19.1 billion in flood damage was prevented by 
flood control facilities in place at that time.
  Our ports move over 95 percent of U.S. overseas trade by weight and 
75 percent by value.
  Between 1970 and 2003, the value of U.S. trade increased 24-fold, and 
70 percent since 1994. That was an average annual growth rate of 10.2 
percent, nearly double the pace of the gross domestic product growth 
during the same period.
  Unfortunately, the American Society of Civil Engineers has issued a 
grade on our navigable waterways infrastructure. They gave it a D- with 
over 50 percent of the locks ``functionally obsolete'' despite 
increased demand.
  Recently, a story in the Wall Street Journal warned of the current 
condition. It begins:

       The nation's freight-bearing waterway system, plagued by 
     age and breakdowns, is saddling the many companies that rely 
     on the network with a growing number of supply disruptions 
     and added costs.
       While some consider it an anachronism in the age of e-
     commerce, the system remains vital to a broad swath of the 
     economy, carrying everything from jet fuel and coal to salt 
     and the wax for coating milk cartons. The network stretches 
     12,000 miles, mostly through the nation's vast web of rivers, 
     and relies on a series of dams and locks, which are enormous 
     chambers that act as elevators for moving barges from one 
     elevation of water to another.
       Much of the infrastructure was built early in the last 
     century. It's showing the effects of time and, according to 
     some, of neglect. Old equipment takes longer to repair, and 
     it's more vulnerable to nature's extremes.

  The bipartisan bill is one that traditionally is produced by the 
Congress every 2 years. However, we have not passed a WRDA bill since 
2000. The longer we wait, the more unmet needs pile up, the more 
complicated the demands upon the bill become, making it harder and 
harder to win approval. For some, the bill is small; for others, it is 
too big; for some, the new regulations are too onerous; and for others, 
the new regulations are not onerous enough.
  Nevertheless, I believe we have struck a balance here, largely on a 
bipartisan basis, that disciplines the new projects to criteria fairly 
applied while addressing a great number of water resource priorities.
  With the new regulations, we have embraced a commonsense, bipartisan 
proposal by Senators Landrieu and Cochran, similar to the bipartisan 
House agreement that requires major projects to be subject to 
independent peer review, and requires, if necessary, mitigation for 
projects be completed at the same time the project is completed, or, in 
special cases, no longer than 1 year after project completion. This 
compromise will impose a cost on communities, particularly smaller 
communities, but it is not as onerous as the new regulations proposed 
last year which ultimately prevented a final agreement from being 
reached between the House and the Senate.
  The commanding features of this bill are its landmark environmental 
and ecosystem restoration authorities. Nearly 60 percent of the bill 
authorizes such efforts, including environmental restoration of the 
Everglades, coastal Louisiana, Chesapeake Bay, Missouri River, Long 
Island Sound, Salton Sea, Connecticut, the Illinois and Mississippi 
Rivers, and others.
  Additionally, we have included the previously introduced bipartisan 
proposal to modernize the aging locks on the Mississippi and Illinois 
Rivers, designed 70 years ago for paddlewheel boats.
  We should do simply for the future what our predecessors did for the 
present and build the systems designed to improve our competitiveness, 
our standard of living, and environmental protection. It does not 
happen overnight and we have experienced far too much delay already. We 
spent 12 years and $70 million to complete what was supposed to be a 6-
year, $25 million study.
  Without a competitive transportation system, the promise of expanded 
trade and commercial growth is empty, job opportunities are lost, and 
we will be unprepared for the challenges of this new century.
  A lot of people don't appreciate the fact that one medium-sized river 
barge tow carries the same freight as 870 trucks. That should speak 
pretty significantly for the efficiency and environmental protection of 
water transportation.
  Eighty years ago, leaders in this Nation wanting to build a better 
tomorrow made investments in our productive capacity to help our 
producers ship goods and hire workers. At that time, investments were 
expensive and controversial. Some even said the investments were not 
justified. The Corps said they were not satisfied.
  But Congress decided otherwise, that it was a better idea to shape 
the future rather than to try to make unsound predictions of the 
future.

[[Page 5910]]

  Eighty million tons of annual cargo later, it is clear Congress was 
right in that judgment. In the last 35 years, waterborne commerce on 
the upper Mississippi River has tripled, but the system is not suited 
to this century. It is a one-lane highway in a four-lane world economy. 
If we fail to act, we lose and our foreign competitors win, outsourc-
ing jobs by Government paralysis.
  Last year, the United States Department of Agriculture chief 
economist Keith Collins predicted corn exports through the Gulf would 
grow 45 percent in 10 years. We asked him why he wasn't making a 50-
year prediction, which was asked of that ridiculous 12-year, $70 
million study. He said nobody in their right mind could make a 
prediction 50 years in the future and it was taking a lot of 
assumptions to make a 10-year prediction. But we cannot see the exports 
grow, we cannot get revenue for our farmers, we cannot strengthen our 
rural communities and improve our balance of trade if trade is 
constrained by the transportation straitjacket we currently have.
  A good friend of mine from Alma, MO, Neal Bredehoeft, is a soybean 
producer from Alma, MO, and president of the American Soybean 
Association. He said yesterday in St. Louis:

       While U.S. farmers are fighting to maintain market share in 
     a fiercely competitive global marketplace, our international 
     competitors are investing in transportation infrastructure. 
     Argentina has invested over $650 million in their 
     transportation systems to make their exports more 
     competitive. Brazil is restructuring its water transportation 
     network to reduce the cost of shipping soybeans by at least 
     75 percent. Due in large part to these efforts, the two 
     countries have captured 50 percent of the total growth in 
     world soybean sales during the past three years.
       Making the necessary upgrades to improve the Mississippi 
     and Illinois waterways would also protect jobs. Navigation on 
     the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers supports over 
     400,000 jobs, including 90,000 high-paying manufacturing 
     jobs.

  I appreciate the strong bipartisan support for this proposal and the 
support from labor, the Farm Bureau, the corn growers, soybean 
producers, Nature Conservancy, the diverse members of MARC 2000, and 
other shippers and carriers fighting to protect and build markets in an 
increasingly competitive marketplace while improving protection for 
this vital resource.
  It is important that we understand the budget implications of this 
legislation in the real world. We are contending with difficult budget 
realities currently. It is critical we be mindful of these realities as 
we make investments in the infrastructure that supports the people in 
our Nation who make and grow and buy and sell things so we can make our 
economy grow, create jobs, and secure our future.
  This is an authorization bill. It does not spend $1. I repeat, 
regrettably, it does not spend $1. It merely authorizes the spending. 
With the allocation provided through the budget, the Appropriations 
Committee and the Congress and the President will fund such projects 
deemed to be of the highest priority and those remaining will not be 
funded because the budget will not permit. Strictly speaking, this bill 
provides options, not commitments. I wish it were otherwise.
  I thank my colleagues on the committee and their staff for the very 
hard work devoted to this difficult matter. I particularly thank 
Chairman Inhofe for his forbearance. I believe if Members work 
cooperatively and aim for the center and not the fringe, we can get a 
bill completed this year. If demands exist that the bill be away from 
the center, going to the fringe, imposing unreasonable restrictions, we 
will go another year with Congress unable to complete our work as we 
did last year, unable to move forward on the 60 percent of economic and 
environmental restoration and the 40 percent of building the 
infrastructure we need to strengthen our economy and make sure we 
remain competitive in the 21st century.
  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________