Nov 8: The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Water Resources and the Environment, Chaired by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), held a hearing to receive testimony on H.R. 135, the Twenty-First Century Water Commission Act of 2007, sponsored by Representative John Linder (R-GA). Witnesses testifying at the hearing included: Representative Linder; Benjamin Grumbles, U.S. EPA's Assistant Administrator for Office of Water; the Deputy Executive Administrator for Planning for the Texas Water Development Board; the National Wildlife Federation; a water rights attorney from Phoenix, AZ; and a professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering from Georgia Institute of Technology. Chairwoman Johnson also delivered an opening statement.
Representative Linder began his testimony by addressing the concerns of some on the Committee that his bill would somehow infringe upon states’ water rights. He said, “First, I want to hasten to assure my friends from Michigan [i.e. Representatives Vern Ehlers (R-MI) and Candice S. Miller (R-MI)] that the only thing worse than a national water policy is a global water policy. This is not to establish a national policy for use of water, but to get people around the same table to bring all of the knowledge we have about water to the same place to advise the Congress and the President.”
Linder explained that there are new ideas all across this country, and the world, that are making their way into the water discussion, and an effort needs to be made to bring them to the same table. The Water Commission will focus on storage, water conservation, and repairing the leaky pipes that contribute to so much unnecessary water loss. Linder noted that Philadelphia alone loses 85 million gallons of water a day through leaky pipes. He said, “We need to increase the revolving loan fund under the Clean Water Act so that more states can fix their problems. In Atlanta, we’re fixing a $3 billion problem with our sewage treatment. We ought to be able to borrow that money at low interest rates from the Federal government under the Clean Water Act.”
Linder finished his testimony by reiterating to the Committee that the intention of the Water Commission is not to establish a national water policy. Rather, he concluded, the Commission’s true intention is to establish exactly what we know about water and what we know works across the country, and then to bring that information to the President and Congress so it can be looked at, and then decide how to help improve our nation’s water needs.
Michigan Representative Miller issued a release stating, "Don't even consider using a seemingly harmless bill to study the nation's water usage as cover to begin a process aimed at taking Great Lakes water." She said, "I don't think I'm being too alarmist about this. Do not look to the Great Lakes to solve the nation's water problems." According to the release, Michigan colleague on the Subcommittee, Vern Ehlers, predicted what might happen if anyone attempted a water grab saying, "I would suspect we'd call up the militia and take up arms. We feel that serious about it." Miller noted that the witness panel, talking about the legislation, included speakers from Arizona, Georgia and Texas -- and none from the Great Lakes region. Miller asked the bill's supporters if they would be willing to add a provision specifically saying the commission wouldn't recommend diverting water from the Great Lakes. Some supporters were somewhat in agreement, though they generally were against taking any point of discussion off the table.
Miller noted that similar legislation was passed by the House in the last Congress, over her objections, but got bottled up in the Senate. This year, it was included in the House Transportation Energy Security and Climate Change Mitigation Act of 2007, approved by the House, though the Senate, again, hasn't taken it up. In a related matter, on October 10, a number of western Senators, including Senators Domenici (R) and Bingaman (D) from New Mexico, introduced S. 2156, the SECURE Water Act, which among other things requires an assessment of whether available surface and groundwater supplies will be available to meet the future needs of the United States [See WIMS 10/11/07].
EPA testified that the Office of Water is working closely with the Western Governors’ Association and the Western States Water Council to implement the recommendations in their June 2006 report, Water Needs and Strategies for a Sustainable Future. Contained within the Report are many recommendations that are consistent with EPA initiatives as well as recommendations contained in a report released by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy titled, A Strategy for Federal Science and Technology to Support Water Availability and Quality in the United States. The responsibility for water, both in terms of quality and quantity, is divided among many different federal agencies as well as each of our states, tribes, and territories. In light of this shared and diverse responsibility, it is imperative that we all work collectively to meet the growing needs and demands of our limited water resources.
David Conrad, Senior Water Resources Specialist with the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) applauded Representative Linder and the 22 cosponsors and indicated that NWF believes there is a "strong need for a national water commission." He emphasized the language of Section 8207 regarding the Commission duties, included in the House-passed comprehensive energy bill, H.R. 3221, which creates a similar commission as that contemplated in H.R. 135. He suggested including the provisions of Section 8207 in Section 4 of H.R. 135. Although, the National Wildlife Federation along with the National Parks Conservation Association are major actors in the Healing Our Waters-Great Lakes Coalition, he did not specifically discuss the issue of Great Lakes water diversion.
Access the hearing website with links to background information and witness testimony (click here). Access a release from Representative Linder (click here). Access a release from Representative Miller (click here). Access the White House report, A Strategy for Federal Science and Technology to Support Water Availability and Quality in the United States, dated September, 2007 (click here). Access links to various media reports of the meeting (click here). Access legislative details for H.R. 135 (click here). Access legislative details for S. 2156 (click here). [*Water, *GLakes]
Showing posts with label Great Lakes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Great Lakes. Show all posts
Friday, November 09, 2007
Monday, November 05, 2007
Bush Vetoes Water Resources Development Act; Override Expected
Nov 2: On Friday, President Bush announced his veto of H.R. 1495, the "Water Resources Development Act of 2007." Some Congressional members called the President's action "galling." The bill had widespread support from Democrats, Republicans, environmental groups, business, and various local governments.
On May 16, 2007, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 91-4, passed its $13.9 billion version of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA, H.R.1495) [See WIMS 5/17/07]. The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a conference to resolve the differences between the House-passed, $15 billion version, approved by a vote of by a vote of 394-25, on April 19, 2007 [See WIMS 4/30/07]. On August 1, 2007, the House approved the Conference report by a vote of 381-40 [See WIMS 8/1/07] and on September 24, 2007, the Conference Report bill, passed the Senate by an overwhelming bipartisan margin of 81 to 12. At the time of the Senate vote on the Conference report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, sent a letter to all U.S. Senators indicating their strong support for the WRDA conference report to H.R. 1495. There has not been a WRDA passed since 2000.
President Bush said, "This bill lacks fiscal discipline. I fully support funding for water resources projects that will yield high economic and environmental returns to the Nation and each year my budget has proposed reasonable and responsible funding, including $4.9 billion for 2008, to support the Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) main missions. However, this authorization bill makes promises to local communities that the Congress does not have a track record of keeping. The House of Representatives took a $15 billion bill into negotiations with a $14 billion bill from the Senate and instead of splitting the difference, emerged with a Washington compromise that costs over $23 billion. This is not fiscally responsible, particularly when local communities have been waiting for funding for projects already in the pipeline. The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing Corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete.
"This bill does not set priorities. The authorization and funding of Federal water resources projects should be focused on those projects with the greatest merit that are also a Federal responsibility. My Administration has repeatedly urged the Congress to authorize only those projects and programs that provide a high return on investment and are within the three main missions of the Corps' civil works program: facilitating commercial navigation, reducing the risk of damage from floods and storms, and restoring aquatic ecosystems. This bill does not achieve that goal. This bill promises hundreds of earmarks and hinders the Corps' ability to fulfill the Nation's critical water resources needs -- including hurricane protection for greater New Orleans, flood damage reduction for Sacramento, and restoration of the Everglades while diverting resources from the significant investments needed to maintain existing Federal water infrastructure. American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.
"I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be good stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill violates that fundamental commitment. For the reasons outlined above, I must veto H.R. 1495."
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said at the time of Senate approval of the Conference report, “If the President chooses to veto the bill, as he has threatened to do, we are committed -- on a bipartisan basis -- to move to override his veto." Making good on that promise she issued a release on November 2, saying, "President Bush's veto of the Water Resources Development Act breaks his commitment to the people of Louisiana to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina; breaks his commitment to America's communities to make them economically strong and protect them from flooding; breaks his commitment to make America's infrastructure a priority; and breaks his commitment to restore our environment, including the Everglades. We are already working across party lines in the Congress to override this ill-advised veto."
Likewise, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, reaffirmed that he intends to lead the effort in the Senate to override President Bush's WRDA veto. Inhofe said, "As a fiscal conservative, I certainly appreciate and share the President's concerns over 'excessive spending' by the Federal government. The fact is, though, that the WRDA bill is not a spending bill; it is an authorizing bill. It simply sets out which projects and programs are allowed to get in line for future funding and sets the maximum amount of money that can be funded. Authorization is the best tool we have for keeping discipline over the annual appropriations process. Additionally, this bill includes a provision requiring independent third-party reviews of certain projects, which will inform future authorizations and appropriations..."
Representative Jim Oberstar (D-MN), Chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and sponsor of the House bill, said President Bush’s veto of the major waterways infrastructure bill is "a mistake," and he expects Congress to override the veto in the next few weeks. Oberstar said, “It’s a sad moment for the presidency and for Congress; it is an unnecessary veto, pointless. For seven years, a succession of Republican congresses has failed to enact the most important internal development bill in this country and it’s all been on this president’s watch.
“With one stroke of the pen, President Bush has halted progress on vital projects that range from the construction of a second lock at Sault Ste. Marie to the restoration of coastal wetlands that protect the Gulf Coast from hurricanes like Katrina. There’s a great deal of concern in this administration about homeland security, but our biggest terrors are flood, hurricane, the freezing up of the locks, and natural disasters on land. These projects in this legislation will deal with the greatest source of terror to the homeland - the natural terror that we seek to prevent with this legislation.”
Oberstar and Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, also issued a joint statement saying, "What makes this veto particularly galling is that President Bush is now asking the American people to spend another $196 billion on Iraq. Yet, he is unwilling to invest our own nation’s future and in the recovery of the Gulf Coast region."
Access the President's veto statement (click here). Access a release from Senator Boxer (click here). Access a release from Senator Inhofe (click here). Access a lengthy release from Representative Oberstar (click here). Access the joint release from Representatives Oberstar and Johnson (click here). Access a 3-page summary of WRDA from Representative Oberstar(click here). Access a 72-page Joint Explanatory Statement from the Conference Committee (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.1495 (click here). Access links to various media reports on the President's action (click here). [*GLakes, *Water]
On May 16, 2007, the U.S. Senate, by a vote of 91-4, passed its $13.9 billion version of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA, H.R.1495) [See WIMS 5/17/07]. The Senate insisted on its amendment and requested a conference to resolve the differences between the House-passed, $15 billion version, approved by a vote of by a vote of 394-25, on April 19, 2007 [See WIMS 4/30/07]. On August 1, 2007, the House approved the Conference report by a vote of 381-40 [See WIMS 8/1/07] and on September 24, 2007, the Conference Report bill, passed the Senate by an overwhelming bipartisan margin of 81 to 12. At the time of the Senate vote on the Conference report, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world’s largest business federation representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region, sent a letter to all U.S. Senators indicating their strong support for the WRDA conference report to H.R. 1495. There has not been a WRDA passed since 2000.
President Bush said, "This bill lacks fiscal discipline. I fully support funding for water resources projects that will yield high economic and environmental returns to the Nation and each year my budget has proposed reasonable and responsible funding, including $4.9 billion for 2008, to support the Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) main missions. However, this authorization bill makes promises to local communities that the Congress does not have a track record of keeping. The House of Representatives took a $15 billion bill into negotiations with a $14 billion bill from the Senate and instead of splitting the difference, emerged with a Washington compromise that costs over $23 billion. This is not fiscally responsible, particularly when local communities have been waiting for funding for projects already in the pipeline. The bill's excessive authorization for over 900 projects and programs exacerbates the massive backlog of ongoing Corps construction projects, which will require an additional $38 billion in future appropriations to complete.
"This bill does not set priorities. The authorization and funding of Federal water resources projects should be focused on those projects with the greatest merit that are also a Federal responsibility. My Administration has repeatedly urged the Congress to authorize only those projects and programs that provide a high return on investment and are within the three main missions of the Corps' civil works program: facilitating commercial navigation, reducing the risk of damage from floods and storms, and restoring aquatic ecosystems. This bill does not achieve that goal. This bill promises hundreds of earmarks and hinders the Corps' ability to fulfill the Nation's critical water resources needs -- including hurricane protection for greater New Orleans, flood damage reduction for Sacramento, and restoration of the Everglades while diverting resources from the significant investments needed to maintain existing Federal water infrastructure. American taxpayers should not be asked to support a pork-barrel system of Federal authorization and funding where a project's merit is an afterthought.
"I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be good stewards of their hard-earned taxpayer dollars. This bill violates that fundamental commitment. For the reasons outlined above, I must veto H.R. 1495."
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said at the time of Senate approval of the Conference report, “If the President chooses to veto the bill, as he has threatened to do, we are committed -- on a bipartisan basis -- to move to override his veto." Making good on that promise she issued a release on November 2, saying, "President Bush's veto of the Water Resources Development Act breaks his commitment to the people of Louisiana to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina; breaks his commitment to America's communities to make them economically strong and protect them from flooding; breaks his commitment to make America's infrastructure a priority; and breaks his commitment to restore our environment, including the Everglades. We are already working across party lines in the Congress to override this ill-advised veto."
Likewise, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, reaffirmed that he intends to lead the effort in the Senate to override President Bush's WRDA veto. Inhofe said, "As a fiscal conservative, I certainly appreciate and share the President's concerns over 'excessive spending' by the Federal government. The fact is, though, that the WRDA bill is not a spending bill; it is an authorizing bill. It simply sets out which projects and programs are allowed to get in line for future funding and sets the maximum amount of money that can be funded. Authorization is the best tool we have for keeping discipline over the annual appropriations process. Additionally, this bill includes a provision requiring independent third-party reviews of certain projects, which will inform future authorizations and appropriations..."
Representative Jim Oberstar (D-MN), Chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and sponsor of the House bill, said President Bush’s veto of the major waterways infrastructure bill is "a mistake," and he expects Congress to override the veto in the next few weeks. Oberstar said, “It’s a sad moment for the presidency and for Congress; it is an unnecessary veto, pointless. For seven years, a succession of Republican congresses has failed to enact the most important internal development bill in this country and it’s all been on this president’s watch.
“With one stroke of the pen, President Bush has halted progress on vital projects that range from the construction of a second lock at Sault Ste. Marie to the restoration of coastal wetlands that protect the Gulf Coast from hurricanes like Katrina. There’s a great deal of concern in this administration about homeland security, but our biggest terrors are flood, hurricane, the freezing up of the locks, and natural disasters on land. These projects in this legislation will deal with the greatest source of terror to the homeland - the natural terror that we seek to prevent with this legislation.”
Oberstar and Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX), Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, also issued a joint statement saying, "What makes this veto particularly galling is that President Bush is now asking the American people to spend another $196 billion on Iraq. Yet, he is unwilling to invest our own nation’s future and in the recovery of the Gulf Coast region."
Access the President's veto statement (click here). Access a release from Senator Boxer (click here). Access a release from Senator Inhofe (click here). Access a lengthy release from Representative Oberstar (click here). Access the joint release from Representatives Oberstar and Johnson (click here). Access a 3-page summary of WRDA from Representative Oberstar(click here). Access a 72-page Joint Explanatory Statement from the Conference Committee (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.1495 (click here). Access links to various media reports on the President's action (click here). [*GLakes, *Water]
Thursday, November 30, 2006
"Appalling" Results Of Great Lakes Sewage Report Card
Nov 29: The Canadian-based, Sierra Legal Defense Fund released its first Great Lakes Sewage Report Card -- an investigative report that analyzes twenty cities in the Great Lakes basin and grades them based on how well they manage their sewage. In a release the organization said, "The results are appalling." Although many cities have made efforts to clean up their act, waters surrounding urban areas throughout the Great Lakes are still commonly unsafe for recreational use and many parts of the vast freshwater ecosystem are in peril. Report author Dr. Elaine MacDonald said, “The Great Lakes basin is one of the most important freshwater ecosystems on the planet -- holding one fifth of the world's freshwater. Yet, the twenty cities we evaluated are dumping the equivalent of more than 100 Olympic swimming pools full of raw sewage directly into the Great Lakes every single day.”
The Great Lakes Sewage Report Card represents the first-ever ecosystem-based survey and analysis of municipal sewage treatment and sewage discharges in the Great Lakes basin. The report grades cities on issues such as collection, treatment and disposal of sewage based on information provided by each municipality. The report documents that many cities in the region have antiquated systems for collecting and treating sewage and regularly release untreated sewage into local waterways. It is estimated that the 20 cities evaluated, representing a third of the region’s 35 million people, dump more than 90 billion liters [approximately 24 billion gallons] of untreated sewage into the Great Lakes each year.
According to a release, the results are disappointing, with cities like Toronto, Syracuse and Hamilton getting below average grades. Detroit (ranked worst), Cleveland and Windsor performed "abysmally and are at the bottom of the class." The cities that fared poorly typically have serious problems related to their combined sewers; antiquated systems that combine storm water and sanitary sewers into a single pipe and are prone to releasing raw sewage during wet weather. Green Bay, Peel Region and Duluth are at the top of the class. All three generally have more sophisticated treatment processes and permit very little sewage to escape into the environment through combined sewer overflows, spills or bypasses.
The 20 cities evaluated in the report include: Cleveland (Ohio), Detroit (Michigan), Duluth (Minnesota), Erie (Pennsylvania), Grand Rapids (Michigan), Green Bay (Wisconsin), Hamilton (Ontario), Kingston (Ontario), London (Ontario), Milwaukee (Wisconsin), Niagara Region (Ontario), Peel Region (Ontario), Rochester (New York), Sarnia (Ontario), Sault Ste. Marie (Ontario), Sudbury, (Ontario) Syracuse (New York), Thunder Bay (Ontario), Toronto (Ontario), Windsor (Ontario).
In addition to grading the cities, the report provides an analysis of the region’s patchwork of sewage treatment laws and policies, and offers several recommendations to ensure the protection of water quality in the Great Lakes for future generations.
Sierra Legal Defense Fund is a non-profit, charitable organization funded by public donations and foundations grants consisting of more than 40 lawyers, scientists and support staff at offices in Vancouver and Toronto. The organization has over 30,000 individual supporters across Canada.
Access a release (click here). Access background information (click here). Access the complete 57-page report (click here). Access the Sierra Legal website for additional information (click here). [*GLakes]
The Great Lakes Sewage Report Card represents the first-ever ecosystem-based survey and analysis of municipal sewage treatment and sewage discharges in the Great Lakes basin. The report grades cities on issues such as collection, treatment and disposal of sewage based on information provided by each municipality. The report documents that many cities in the region have antiquated systems for collecting and treating sewage and regularly release untreated sewage into local waterways. It is estimated that the 20 cities evaluated, representing a third of the region’s 35 million people, dump more than 90 billion liters [approximately 24 billion gallons] of untreated sewage into the Great Lakes each year.
According to a release, the results are disappointing, with cities like Toronto, Syracuse and Hamilton getting below average grades. Detroit (ranked worst), Cleveland and Windsor performed "abysmally and are at the bottom of the class." The cities that fared poorly typically have serious problems related to their combined sewers; antiquated systems that combine storm water and sanitary sewers into a single pipe and are prone to releasing raw sewage during wet weather. Green Bay, Peel Region and Duluth are at the top of the class. All three generally have more sophisticated treatment processes and permit very little sewage to escape into the environment through combined sewer overflows, spills or bypasses.
The 20 cities evaluated in the report include: Cleveland (Ohio), Detroit (Michigan), Duluth (Minnesota), Erie (Pennsylvania), Grand Rapids (Michigan), Green Bay (Wisconsin), Hamilton (Ontario), Kingston (Ontario), London (Ontario), Milwaukee (Wisconsin), Niagara Region (Ontario), Peel Region (Ontario), Rochester (New York), Sarnia (Ontario), Sault Ste. Marie (Ontario), Sudbury, (Ontario) Syracuse (New York), Thunder Bay (Ontario), Toronto (Ontario), Windsor (Ontario).
In addition to grading the cities, the report provides an analysis of the region’s patchwork of sewage treatment laws and policies, and offers several recommendations to ensure the protection of water quality in the Great Lakes for future generations.
Sierra Legal Defense Fund is a non-profit, charitable organization funded by public donations and foundations grants consisting of more than 40 lawyers, scientists and support staff at offices in Vancouver and Toronto. The organization has over 30,000 individual supporters across Canada.
Access a release (click here). Access background information (click here). Access the complete 57-page report (click here). Access the Sierra Legal website for additional information (click here). [*GLakes]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
