[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 8870-8871]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




              COMMERCE-SCIENCE-JUSTICE APPROPRIATIONS BILL

  Mr. PERDUE. Mr. President, I rise to continue setting the record 
straight for the ongoing issue of water rights between Alabama, 
Florida, Georgia, and the Army Corps of Engineers.
  As I said yesterday, language from the committee report that 
accompanies this CJS--Commerce-Justice-Science--bill has been inserted 
in an attempt to strong-arm the outcome of a matter that should clearly 
be left to the States. This is an interstate dispute, with negotiations 
and litigation still pending, and much like other parts of the country, 
the States have been in negotiations for many years.
  Clearly, this is not a matter for Congress. This is not a matter that 
Congress in any way needs to insert itself into. Furthermore, this is a 
debate we have already had.
  Last year, the leaders of both Chambers here in Washington determined 
that Congress has no business using the appropriations process to tip 
the scales one way or the other on this water rights issue. Why are we 
going through this again?
  This is not the work our constituents had in mind for us when they 
sent us here. They expect us to deliver results on the priority issues 
of our day, and they expect the national interests and the Constitution 
to come before the self-interests of a select few Members of the 
Senate, but, yet again, the senior Senator from Alabama is attempting 
to impose Washington as the solution for a matter that should be and is 
being handled by the States.
  For over 20 years, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia have litigated and 
negotiated over water rights issues. Despite decades of litigation, 
neither Alabama nor Florida has been able to prove any real or 
substantial harm resulting from the Army Corps of Engineers' or 
Georgia's water management practices. As a matter of fact, they are 
under court direction today.
  The numbers show this. Since 1980, the population of the Metro 
Atlanta water district has more than doubled from just over 2 million 
to over 5 million, and that is as a percentage of about 10.5 million 
people in the State as a whole in 2014. Since 2000 alone, the 
population of this metro area has grown by more than 1 million.
  Since the formation of the Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning 
District in 2001, water withdrawals in

[[Page 8871]]

Metro Atlanta have decreased dramatically even as the population grew 
by more than 1 million. As a matter of fact, the consumption per capita 
has gone down by more than one-third.
  This is good water management. Georgia has been a good steward of 
water resources, and this has been repeatedly validated. In fact, Metro 
Atlanta water systems have gone above and beyond the necessary water 
management practices to ensure that they are conserving as much as 
possible and efficiently properly using the water they do withdraw.
  Again, the numbers back this up. There are 15 counties in the metro 
district. As I said before, from 2000 to 2013, water withdrawals have 
declined by more than one-third. Both Alabama and Florida have 
consistently lost in court because their claims have been found to be 
baseless. Because they cannot win in court, now we see the senior 
Senator from Alabama trying to win through the appropriations process 
in Congress.
  There is a case on this issue currently being litigated between the 
States in the U.S. Supreme Court that is due to be heard by a court-
appointed special master in November of this year. There is another 
case pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 
and yet another one is pending in the U.S. District Court for the 
Northern District of Georgia. We need to allow the legal process to run 
its natural course on these cases.
  But, again, some in this body are short-circuiting that litigation 
through the appropriations process. That is just not appropriate. This 
short-circuiting would have improper influence on the outcomes of these 
court cases. That speaks volumes.
  We are not sent here to pick winners and losers among the States. 
This is a matter for the States involved to litigate and negotiate, as 
are all interstate disputes. By the way, this could set a dangerous 
precedent not just for these three States but for all States that have 
water rights issues.
  This is a matter for the States involved to litigate and negotiate, 
as are all interstate disputes. This is not a matter to be dealt with 
through the appropriations process of the Federal Government.
  Attempts at this kind of Washington meddling are exactly why many of 
our constituents have lost trust in this body. We must remove this 
language from the CJS bill or we will set a dangerous precedent moving 
forward.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________