[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 5]
[House]
[Page 7244]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            ENERGY AND WATER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, the House is considering this week the 
appropriations for energy and water. These are important decisions, 
vital programs that seriously touch all of us across the country, and 
have important decisions on resource allocation.
  There were two elements in the accompanying report that I would like 
to highlight for a moment. First is that I am pleased that the 
committee has included language encouraging the Army Corps of Engineers 
to continue efforts to construct new tribal housing at The Dalles Dam 
on the Columbia River between Oregon and Washington.
  The Columbia River is the cultural artery that ties together the 
Northwest. It is an engine for agriculture and for industry. But long 
before we started changing that river into a machine with the 
construction of dams in the 1930s, the artery was the core of the 
civilization for thousands of years for Native Americans.
  The river looked very different. It was faster-moving and steeper. It 
produced salmon in such abundance that it was rumored you could walk 
across their backs as they swam upstream to spawn. And it provided 
food, trade, and a cultural identity for Native American tribes for 
years. These tribes--now known as the Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm 
Springs, and Yakama Nation--were never fully compensated for the 
disruption to their native ways of life, despite promises to the 
contrary.
  We have found that the Army Corps of Engineers now understands that 
it has the authority to begin the process of building another housing 
village at The Dalles Dam. It is important that we encourage and 
support this work, and continue to expand it through congressional 
action. It is the least we can do to keep faith with Native Americans, 
who have had their lives dramatically disrupted with that construction.
  Second, the report also continues an unfortunate rider, which blocks 
the Army Corps of Engineers from modernizing how it develops water 
resource projects. This has been an interest of mine since I first 
started serving on the Water Resources Subcommittee 20 years ago in 
Congress.
  The Corps operates on an antiquated methodology that are known as 
1983 principles and guidelines for water infrastructure projects. It 
directs the Corps to focus on maximizing national economic development 
benefits when planning projects, not looking comprehensively at the 
benefits and the problems attained for everybody. It severely limits 
the Corps' ability to select projects which minimize environmental 
impacts, or contribute to the national interest in ways other than a 
narrowly defined economic development.
  I worked for years with the Corps back when General Flowers was in 
charge, and there was great interest on the part of the Corps to be 
able to update the ways that they operate to incorporate modern 
science, engineering, and environmental awareness. Those principles and 
guidelines were drafted back in the Carter administration.
  398 months have elapsed since they were enacted into law. In that 
period of time, a lot has happened with food, fashion, technology, and 
science. It is time for the Army Corps of Engineers to be able to base 
its planning and activities on the best science and the best 
engineering, for the needs that we have today.
  I sincerely hope that we can come together and recognize that it is a 
need to finally remove that rider. It was frustrating for me, having 
worked for years, to finally achieve authorization in 2007 for the 
principles and guidelines to be updated. Yet, the Corps, having done 
that job, cannot use the updated principles and guidelines because of 
shortsighted action on the part of Congress.
  I strongly urge that my friends and colleagues in Congress take a 
look at this restrictive language. Think about the opportunities 
available to us to allow the Corps of Engineers to do its job right 
based on the latest information available to us. This does not speak 
well of the ability of Congress to prepare for the future. It makes the 
job of the Army Corps of Engineers much harder, and it makes it less 
likely that we are going to give people the benefit that they need from 
the various things that the Corps constructs and plans.

                          ____________________