[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 18]
[House]
[Pages 23327-23328]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 AUTHORIZING SECRETARY OF ARMY TO CARRY OUT HURRICANE AND STORM DAMAGE 
            REDUCTION, MORGANZA TO GULF OF MEXICO, LOUISIANA

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 6428) to authorize the Secretary of the Army to 
carry out certain elements of the project for hurricane and storm 
damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 6428

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. MORGANZA TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LOUISIANA.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Army may carry out 
     the following elements of the project for hurricane and storm 
     damage reduction, Morganza to the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana, 
     substantially in accordance with the report of the Chief of 
     Engineers, dated August 23, 2002, and the supplemental report 
     dated July 22, 2003:
       (1) The Houma Lock feature of the project.
       (2) The Reach H-3, Reach J-2, Bush Canal floodgate, Point 
     aux Chene floodgate, Reach H-2, Reach J-3, Reach J-1, and 
     Placid Canal structural elements of the project
       (b) Credit.--The Secretary shall credit toward the non-
     Federal share of the cost of the project elements the cost of 
     design and construction work carried out by the non-Federal 
     interest before the date of the partnership agreement for the 
     project elements if the Secretary determines that the work is 
     integral to the project elements.
       (c) Operation and Maintenance.--The operation, maintenance, 
     repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of the Houma 
     Navigation Canal lock complex and the Gulf Intracoastal 
     Waterway floodgate features that provide for inland waterway 
     transportation shall be a Federal responsibility, in 
     accordance with the feasibility report dated March 2002 and 
     section 102 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2212).
       (d) Navigational Consistency.--The Secretary shall maintain 
     the Houma Navigation Canal at dimensions at least equal to 
     those of the lock identified in subsection (c). The Houma 
     Lock feature shall be implemented under an exclusive 
     partnership agreement.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 6428 was introduced by the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. Melancon) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker).
  This bill simply authorizes the Secretary of the Army to carry out 
certain elements of a project known as the Morganza to the Gulf of 
Mexico, which was included in a report by the Chief of Engineers.
  This is part of an important hurricane and storm damage reduction 
project that is sorely needed. I urge support of the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska, our committee 
chairman, for agreeing to bring this bill up in the interest of the 
Louisiana delegation, all of whom are concerned about moving this 
project ahead so it can be in line to receive funding to start work on 
this project before the next hurricane storm season reaches the gulf.
  This project involves multiple features: 72 miles of levees south of 
Houma, Louisiana; pumping station protection; road closure floodgates 
and ramps; channel closure floodgates; and a lock structure where the 
project crosses the Gulf Intercoastal Waterway.
  It is unfortunate we have to take this piece out of the bill that we 
passed twice in this body under the leadership of the distinguished 
chairman. The House has done its work and done its work well. We have 
done it over three Congresses, and the other body has failed to act. 
That is why we are here tonight to try to address a matter of 
significant importance to the people in the gulf region.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6428, a bill authorizing the 
Secretary of the Army to carry out certain portions of the hurricane 
and storm damage reduction project for the Morganza to the Gulf, 
Louisiana.
  The Morganza to the Gulf project is vital for meeting the hurricane 
and storm damage protection needs of coastal Louisiana, especially its 
citizens in Houma, and the surrounding communities that were devastated 
by Hurricane Rita last year. This project is comprised

[[Page 23328]]

of multiple project features, including approximately 72 miles of 
levees south of Houma, Louisiana, pumping station protection, road 
closure floodgates and ramps, channel closure floodgates, and a lock 
structure where the project crosses the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
  The Morganza to the Gulf project was included in the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2000, as a conditional authorization. However, the 
Corps of Engineers failed to complete a favorable report of the Chief 
of Engineers for the project before the December 2000 deadline.
  Since that time, the Congress has failed to enact any further water 
resources development acts. Unfortunately, tonight, we will adjourn 
another Congress without enacting a water resources bill.
  The language in this legislation is modeled after the language 
contained in H.R. 2864, the Water Resources Development Act of 2005, 
which passed this House on July 14, 2005 by an overwhelming vote of 
406-14.
  While my preference would be to authorize this project through 
regular order in the passage of the broader Water Resources Development 
Act, at this late hour in the session, work will not be completed on 
the larger bill.
  This is unfortunate because it only further delays the opportunity 
for the Corps of Engineers to provide essential flood control, 
navigation, and ecosystem restoration projects to our Nation, and vital 
public safety and economic benefits to our constituents.
  We are now just a few days shy of six years since the last water 
resources bill was enacted. This is far too long.
  I am certain that there will be questions as to why Congress was 
unable to enact a water resources bill in the 109th Congress, 
especially since this is the first time since 2000 that both the House 
and the Senate chambers were each able to approve legislation for the 
other body to consider.
  A chief reason is that the current administration has no commitment 
to the Nation's premier water-related infrastructure agency.
  The administration fails to understand the importance of the Corps of 
Engineers and the vital work that this agency does for the American 
people.
  The administration's lack of support for a comprehensive water 
resources development act has only made Congress's work more difficult.
  During consideration in both the House and Senate, the administration 
released two statements of administration policy that were highly 
critical of the Congress's efforts, especially over the 
administration's concern with the overall costs of the two bills.
  However, what this administration fails to recognize is that the 
roughly $10 billion in project authorizations contained in the House-
passed version, and the $12 billion in the Senate-passed version 
reflect 6 years of requests since the Water Resources Development Act 
of 2000.
  With Congress's failure to approve the water resources development 
act this year, we should expect next year's bill to cost more than 
either the House or Senate-passed versions--perhaps as much as $15 
billion.
  These numbers are consistent with the historical costs of past water 
resources bills, and further delay only results in making these vital 
projects more expensive over time.
  Congress must also share the blame for its failure to deliver a 
comprehensive water resources bill this year.
  With both the House and Senate, and the White House, under Republican 
control, it would seem that passage of this legislation should have 
been achievable.
  In spite of the significant efforts of both the chairman of the 
conference committee and my Chairman, Mr. Young, the House and the 
Senate have been unable to reach agreement on a final package.
  I am confident that our Committee will make the passage and enactment 
of a water resources development act a number-one priority in 2007.
  Mr. Speaker, by passing this legislation tonight, the House is 
agreeing to allow the Morganza to the Gulf project to move forward 
based on its individual merit, and the need to increase the level of 
flood protection for coastal Louisiana.
  The House has resisted the temptation to add other meritorious Corps 
of Engineers project authorizations to the schedule this evening. I 
would advise the other body to resist this temptation and not turn this 
authorization into an attempt to move a miniature water resources bill 
before the end of the session.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 6428.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Melancon).
  Mr. MELANCON. Mr. Speaker, in the Water Resource Development Act of 
2000, Congress authorized a project for hurricane protection known as 
Morganza to the Gulf. This contingent authorization would protect over 
200,000 people in their homes, but the contingent authorization expired 
due to a delayed chief's report.
  The citizens of Louisiana that live behind this future levee system 
have passed a tax on themselves that generates roughly $5 million per 
year in funds dedicated strictly to fund this hurricane protection 
system. They have waited 6 years to begin construction on this project 
that Congress directed to be constructed due to a delayed report from 
the Corps of Engineers.
  H.R. 6428, introduced by Congressmen Baker and Melancon, authorizes 
only a small portion of the project as a whole. This bill would allow 
the people in Terrebonne Parish to begin protecting themselves while we 
work towards a complete water resources bill.
  The Melancon-Baker partial authorization bill includes only two 
reaches of levees, tying into the already existing system of levees. 
These levees would provide the most protection possible with the 
limited resources currently available.
  The bill also authorizes the lock complex on the Houma Navigation 
Canal to protect against devastating storm surges, such as the one 
during Hurricane Katrina that ran up the Mississippi River-Gulf outlet 
and destroyed St. Bernard Parish. In addition, Houma would be protected 
from salt water intrusion in their drinking water and the degradation 
of the wetlands.
  I urge passage of H.R. 6428. I wish to thank Mr. Oberstar and Mr. 
Young and the committee for all of their kindnesses to help us move 
this forward.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
to point out that I have toured St. Bernard Parish with my wife who is 
from New Orleans, and we have seen the extraordinary destruction caused 
by Hurricane Katrina to the residents and the absolute abject 
devastation of an area that hasn't experienced anything of this nature 
in 138 years.
  This legislation is vitally important to correct the failures of the 
past and prevent them from happening in the future. The gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Melancon) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), 
both members of our committee, have been strong advocates for this 
project.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the 
bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 6428.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds of those voting having 
responded in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and the bill was 
passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________