tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN April 29, 2015 9:00pm-11:01pm EDT
titiveness and training the work force of tomorrow through the establishment of manufacturing centers throughout the country. as some of these centers lie within the purr view of the energy and water appropriations bill, i want to take this opportunity to thank the chairman for working with me on this issue and to clarify that this bill we are considering today funds the establishment of at least one new sent that are can be coordinated with the department of commerce. and with that i thank the chairman and i yield to the chairman. mr. simpson: i thank the gentleman and can confirm this bill establishes one new center. i look forward to working with you in the future as this bill moves forward. reed reed i yield back. mr. simpson: we have no more requests for time and i would like my colleague from ohio, i yield back the balance of my time and look forward to moving forward. the chair: the gentleman from idaho yields back. the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute
rule. each amendment shall be debatable equally controlled by a proponent and opponent. no pro forma amendment shall be be in order. and may offer up to 10 pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. the chair of the committee of the whole, in recognition on the basis of whether the member. amendments shall be considered read. the clerk will read. the clerk: the following sums are appropriated for energy and water development for the fiscal year 2016. namely, title 1 corps of engineers, civil department of the army, corps of engineers civil, appropriations shall be for authorized functions pertaining to river and harbor, floods and storm damage reduction and related efforts.
investigation $110 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. gosar: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar. after the dollar amount insert increased by $1 million. page 27, line 13, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $1 million. the chair: the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five minutes. mr. gosar: i rise to offer an amendment that will help reduce the backlog of army corps of engineer projects. transfers $1 mill fron the administrative budget to bring it closer to the fiscal year 2015 enacted appropriation level. investigation account funds the planning and environmental
studies for important corps projects prior to construction. there is a large backlog of projects a that are essential to improving infrastructures for communities and ecosystems restoration and providing clean water and clean water storage. these projects are critical to the west and many other parts of the nation. the committee recognized that the administration's budget was much too low. the amount appropriated is $12 million below the 2015 fiscal levels. at a time of historic drought, we shouldn't be reducing investigation dollars that will allow worth while community dollars to move forward. the community has provided significant safeguards to ensure the funds transferred will go to the studies and planning for the most viable projects. support for this is action we can support timely development.
i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i thank the chair and ranking member for their work on this bill and with that. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. anyone seeking time? mr. gosar: i yield back. the chair: question on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. further amendments? the chair: clerk will read.
the chair: clerk will read. the clerk: construction $1 billion. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? mr. gosar: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar, after the dollar amount insert increased by $3 million, page 27 line 13, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $3 million the chair: the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. gosar: i rise for another amendment that will reduce the backlog of army corps of engineer projects by providing resources to the corps' construction budget. i applaud for the resources
above the president's budget request but the recommended level is $8.5 million below the 2015 level. a drought is plaguing the west. more than 92% of the state of california is experiencing severe drought. over scientists claim this is the worst drought for western states in more than 100 years and approximately 60% of the west is experiencing moderate drought or worst affecting 52 million people. at a time of historic drought, we shouldn't be reducing construction dollars that improve infrastructure, improve ecosystem restoration, provide clean water. the committee report on this bill raised important concerns about the cuts proposed by this administration to the corps of engineers' construction budget. from the committee report, i quote, the construction account
would see the largest reduction $467 million and largest percentage reduction of 29%. the budget request is inadequate meeting the critical infrastructure needs of this nation. numerous continual studies and projects will be suspended or slowed leaving communities vulnerable to floods and hindering economic growth and international competitiveness. once again, the administration claims to understand the importance understanding rings hollow. once again however, the committee rejects the priority placed on the infrastructure in the budget request. the committee has provided significant safeguards in the report that will ensure that the funds go to the best projects that will prevent future flooding, create jobs and enhance national, regional economic development.
support for this amendment is to support timely development of critical water projects to benefit water projects throughout the nation. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. anyone seeking time? the gentleman from idaho. mr. simpson: i'm not going to oppose the gentleman's amendment but easy to draft amendments and take money out of -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. simpson: i mean, who is not going to be in support of that. this committee has worked hard to address the issues. we know about the drought in california and other places and done a good job trying to fund this. if the gentleman wants to take money out of the department of administration, it is kind of meaningless, but i understand what the gentleman is trying to do. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona.
mr. gosar: i yield back. the chair: question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. murphy of florida, page 16, line 16, after the dollar amount insert increased by $1 million, page 7 line 3 insert decreased by $1 million. the chair: the chair now recognizes the gentleman from florida. mr. murphy: i want to thank the chair and ranking member for their extremely hard work on the underlying bill and ongoing commitment to everglades restoration. i rise today because of this very moment in my district in florida, toxic blew-green algae is threatening the area. the amendment i'm offering along
with the gentleman from florida will enhance the restoration efforts in south florida and help put a stop to this vicious cycle once and for all. the watershed stretches as far north as orlando. due to rapid development, the natural flow of water from north to south where the system has been severely disrupted and inundated with freshwater discharges that harm our communities east and west of the lake. florida bay needs fresh water to restore natural ecology. however, moving clean water south to restore the entire quico system is no small feat.
and how critical the everglades restoration efforts are throughout the whole system. supporting the corps on ongoing work in the everglades is key for water quality in the watershed which includes' myers and cape coral and palm beaches that i represent and throughout florida. right now, a toxic blew-green algae bloom pictured here is threatening waterwaist. when toxic blooms hit our water health advisories like this are posted. right here. warning people, do not touch the very water that is the center of their livelihoods. supporting the corps' everglades work can help move restoration projects closer to restoration like the c-44 reservoir in martin county which will hold water back in the fragile areas.
this is not the first time i have come to the house floor to address this issue. every year, our communities face this same threat and to the people i represent, it is unsustainable and it's time to stop this before unlasting damage is done. i, along with many people committed to protecting our water and our community, will not rest until the health advisories posted along our rivers disappear once and for all. these aren't just our precious everglades in florida. this echo system is america's river of grass, with no place like it in the world. it must be protected at all costs. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. and i yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from florida, mr. clawson. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes.
clause clause thank you for -- thank you for your leadership and success in this endeavor. my first steps towards congress began one summer day two years ago while i was wading in the gulf of mexico with my father who was the autumn in his lifetime. walking beside my dad, the old vet and i couldn't see our own toes because of the dirty water. dad looked at me and said son, do something about this. the gulf had been contaminated by lake okeechobee. algae was in full bloom. two years later, i humbly stand here and ask you, please join me and let's do something about this. clean water is both an
environmental issue and a business issue. the dirty discharges damage our tourism and economy, our drinking water, our beaches, our businesses and our national treasure, the everglades. the federal government and the state of florida are already working to restore the everglades with a large -- with larger freshwater supply. but we can do more. i'm asking you to do more by votingy on this amendment to help expedite like projects like the critical south florida restoration and the hoover dike. thank you. . i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. is anyone else seeking time on the amendment? question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. frump does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the
desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: offered by mr. duffy of wisconsin, reduce by $10 million, increase by $10 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223 the gentleman from wisconsin and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. duffy: thank you mr. speaker. i rise to offer an amendment for all those around the great lakes. great lakes restoration program is responsible for planning, design and construction of projects to protect and restore the fisheries and aquatic habitat of the great lakes. these projects include restoration of riverside and wetland habitats, construction of fish passages and improving spawning in nursery habitats. a critical part of the program is it requires 35% cost share from a local sponsor, so it's not just federal money it's
local money as well to fund this project. this program is widely supported by those with a stake in and on the tpwhrakes, including the great lakes commission, the ilicense of the great lakes, the great lakes fishery commission and the great lakes fishing community. one of my constituents al, a board member of the sport fisherman association shared with me the importance of the program of of he recounted, and i quote new york recent discussions with groups in the great lakes basin sport fishermen are in unanimous agreement that the program offers invaluable support to fishery has been tet and ecosystem restoration projects that maintain and restore the health of our great lakes. end quote. this program has a broad, bipartisan support and the backing of environment, industry and recreation groups not often in this house do we see this kind of support across
the spectrum. and it is authorized under wrrda. similar to other regional restoration programs in south florida and the louisiana coastline funded by the army corps of engineers in this bill. unfortunately, for the past several years, the corps has chosen to include no funding for this program in the budget request. this is despite the calls from congress to do so. in fact, language in the final funding bill for fiscal year 20125 urged the corps to quote budget for this aquatic habitat restoration program in future budgets missions as it is important to the overall great lakes restoration effort, end quote, but again they didn't include it in their budget. this amendment is intended to ensure that the army corps actually provides the $10 million necessary for the program in this fiscal year this program should not have to rely on funding from other great lakes programs or wait for the leftovers of the corps to fund
this very important project. i would hope that the corps would follow the advice of congress and actually account for this program in next year's budget request. actually listen to us. i want to thank chairman simpson and ranking member kaptur for their work on this legislation and for their support of this issue and i would urge my colleagues to support our great lakes to support our fish, and support this bipartisan effort. with that i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from ohio. ms. kaptur: i would like to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. kaptur: i am not opposed to the gentleman's objection i want to say as a fellow great lakes member, i appreciate his coming down here tonight at this late hour and representing the interests of the great lakes. we need stronger voices and you obviously are one of those. i'm so glad you're calling the corps to task to pay attention to our region and all the improvements that are necessary.
to deal with the most vie call body of fresh water on the face of the earth, and certainly in our country. i want to thank you congressman duffy very much for your proposal. i think that the corps will hear you. many of us want to work with you. and to do what we can to help not wrust this generation but those that follow in having access to this globally critical precious fresh water resource we call the great lakes. thank you for coming down this evening. i yield the gentleman my remaining time. the chair: the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. duffy: i thank ms. kaptur for her support of the amendment. and for all her work on the great lakes. it's remarkable that we have such a wonderful bipartisan group that have a wide variety of issue opinions on issues in this chamber but come together to help support our great lakes fisheries so thank you for your support, i yield back.
the chair: the gentlelady from ohio yields back. anyone else seeking recognition? the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from wisconsin. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas seek recognition? the clerk will read. the clerk: page 4 line 3 mississippi river and tributaries. $275 million. the chair: clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment.
will the gentleman submit a copy of the amendment? >> gladly. the chair: the gentleman from idaho. pll dent: i reserve a point of order against the amendment. the chair: the point of order is reserved. the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 4, line 7 after the dollar amount insert increased by $27 million. page 2 , line 5, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $96 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223, the gentleman from arkansas and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arkansas. >> first let me thank the
committee chairman and staff for putting this bill together, i know it's taken a will the of time and work with a lot of people to get here today. my amendment concerns funding for the largest flood control project in the world to its f.y. 2015 levels. it's critical to make sure the river carries the stream of trade necessary to united states commerce. mr. crawford: billions of tons of cargo are transported up and down the river each year. m.y.r. plays a critical role in preventing floods. since its inception in 1928, our nation has received $45 for every $1 invested while preventing $62 billion in flood damages and protecting four million residents of the lower mississippi river valerie. the skets of the project was on display in 2007 when the system
withstood flooding. not only does it protect lives and plot, it protects 1/2 fwation along the river and helps support a vibrant economy. cargo on the river saves billions in costs. i believe it's prudent to sufficiently fund projects like those covered under mrnt that give taxpayers return on their investment. i thank the chairman for his consideration. however at this time i will withdraw my amendment at this time but look forward to continuing to work with the committee and chairman through appropriations process on this critical investment in the mid south region. with that, i yield the balance of my time to the chairman. the chair: without objection the gentleman is withdrawn. the gentleman from idaho.
the gentleman withdraws his point of order. the clerk: operation and maintenance. the chair: for what purpose does -- does the gentleman rise? the clerk: $3,05 ,000,000. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number six offered by mr. high zen fwa of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 2 23, the gentleman from michigan and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. huizenga: i rise this evening to offer an amendment along with the gentlewoman mitigating circumstance friend, ms. hawn from california, to ensure that the -- ms. hahn from california to ensure that we meet our obligations. just last year, this body overwhelmingly passed wrrda by a vote of 412-4.
it was signed into law by president obama. wrrda includes a glide path to increase harbor maintenance funding to a level collected through the harbor maintenance trust fund tax. directing congress this fiscal year to spend 69% of all the funds collected from the user fee of that harbor maintenance. now that's just 69% this year with a 10-year glide path. we're pleased that we're going to be able to use all of that funding for its intended purposes. while i was hoping to achieve full expenditure for the trust fund right away, i was willing to compromise on this glide path as a step in the right direction. unfortunately the current version of the energy and water bill falls short of the mark by just over $36 million. i'd like to thank the chairman for working with us in a bipartisan and i should say bicoastal way. my -- coming from the west side of michigan, the west coast of michigan, we've got the west coast of the country with
california but finding a bipartisan solution to hit the target and offset the cost by reducing spending elsewhere. we can hit this wrrda target and we believe that this will ensure 140 federally mane tained commercial and recreational harbors are adequately maintained. these harbor channels, like muskegon and holland in my district, are the life blood of these very communities. let's keep our promise to these communities and to the taxpayers who support this and allow their ports and harbors to be engines of economic growth and create jobs for american workers, farmers and manufacturers. again thank you for working with us mr. chairman. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? ms. hahn: i rise to claim time in opposition to the amendment that i do not oppose it. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. hahn: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlelady is
recognized. ms. hahn: i join my colleague and good friend from michigan in offering the huizenga-hahn amendment to the energy and water appropriations bill to utilize the harbor maintenance trust fund at the target set forth in the recently passed water resources reform and development act. as my colleague said, this is a very important part of what we compromised on in the wrrda bill. as a representative of the nation's busiest port flex in los angeles along with long beach, and the co-founder of the ports caucus along with ted poe i fought so hard since the first day i came here to congress to increase the funding for our nation's ports and to fully utilize this harbor maintenance trust fund to ensure that the money goes that's collected at our ports goes back to our ports. after working for months with my colleagues we reached a plan to finally put the harbor maintenance trust fund to work and fully utilize it by 2025.
but this bill on the floor today fails to follow the law we passed just last year with an overwhelming vote of 404-4. this bill is $36 million behind our target. for our nation to emain globally competitive, we need to fund our port infrastructure. according to the army corps of engineers we need to fully fund our harbor maintenance tax for five years to fully dredge our ports. ports are crucial across this country, americans expect to go to target and have tennis shoes or toys on its shelves. our farmers need efficient ports to export our agriculture products and we cannot let america's infrastructure crumble. that's unacceptable. . the chair: the the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> i recognize congressman from north carolina for as much time
as he would like to consume. three minutes are left. mr. rouzer: i encourage my colleagues to support this amendment because we need to provide the necessary funding to make sure our ports are fully dredged. the port in wilmington, north carolina, plays a vital rolex porting goods to foreign markets. the recent study showed that wilmington's port contributes $14 billion supports directly and indirectly nearly 77,000 jobs in our state. without the proper funding our ports will continue to deteriorate and risk putting our local industry, indeed america at a competitive disadvantage. mr. chairman, i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan
reserves. the gentlelady from california. >> i yield two minutes to mr. green. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. green: i rise to speak in favor of the amendment and first i would like to commend our appropriations committee's efforts on the army corps of engineers budget. the committee's work this year despite low numbers in the budget has been extremely difficult. and i thank the staff for your hard work in working with us. in texas we have a serious serious energy and water infrastructure needs representing the large part of the port of houston, construction money is significant. i greatly appreciate the committee's efforts to fund our needs by appropriating more than $32 million for harbor maintenance but does not reflect the amount that port of houston needs. the second largest port in the country and ranks number one in
tonage. and the port requires $50 million annually. the port of houston has a backlog of projects totalling $100 million. the port of houston has revenue for the state and federal government. to meet the challenges, port of houston needs the funds allocated from the harbor maintenance trust fund. wrrda requires 69% of fees be spent on related activities. while the energy and water appropriators have done great things this bill falls short for ports across the country. i support the amendment and the $37 million shortfall significantly impacts to receive larger ships and again i ask my colleagues to support pt amendment. and i thank my colleagues for
the time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady reserves? ms. hahn: i ask unanimous consent to insert my colleague from massachusetts's, representative lynch's remarks into the record. the chair: that will be covered under gentlelady. the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from michigan. >> i recognize recognize the gentleman from louisiana for one minute. >> i rise in support of this amendment to ensure that congress funds important infrastructure projects. the trust fund takes in enough revenue to provide the necessary maintenance of our harbor, ports and channels. expenditures has failed to keep up. this amendment will keep us on
schedule to hit the harbor maintenance target authorized by law in the water resources reform and development act. this provides dredging and maintainance for critical ports and channels through the country. these funds have been used to provide needed dredging at the lake providence harbor and ensure that the black river and the jay bennett johnson waterway remain open to transportation and commerce. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and keep our nation's critical arteries open for business. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan has one minute. you reserve? mr. huizenga: i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady from california has one minute. ms. hahn: i want to thank chairman simpson, ranking member kaptur for allowing us to offer this amendment tonight and i want to thank my colleague, mr.
huizenga for the incredible passion and your ability to move this forward in a way that was acceptable tonight. i think our ports and waterways across this country will thank you. but more importantly i really believe when our ports and waterways are strong, this country will be strong and i thank you very much for that. and i urge all my colleagues to support the huizenga-hahn amendment. mr. huizenga: i thank my colleague, ms. hahn for the work on this amendment. it has been a pleasure to work with you over a few years as we have gone to battle over this issue and for this issue and ultimately as you point out having a port system that is functional, that is usable, is critical to the economy of our nation. and i want to thank chairman
simpson for his work and willingness to sit down and work through some issues with us. i pledge to you and i know representative hahn does as well, that as we are going through this process we will continue to refine how the harbor maintenance trust fund works and i look forward to having this amendment be passed. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. simpson: mr. chairman i want to thank the gentlelady from california and the gentleman from california for working on this. the challenge that presents us with the harbor maintenance trust fund the way it's scored and accounted for. if you have a problem and going to tax problem in order to address that problem you ought to spend that money you are receiving to address the problem. instead what happens is we spend, as i think the gentleman
said 69% is the target only spend 69% of what came in this year on actually dredging the harbors. that seems rather silly. i think we ought to be able to spend it all. if we don't spend it all, we shouldn't tax it. the problem is, the way we score things and the way we budget around here is we are given a cap in the committee. we have to have our total bill come in under that cap. if we spend more money in the harbor maintenance area, even though we have that money in a trust fund, then we have to decrease spending in everything else such as the other energy portions of the bill. so increasing it even more decreases what we can spend in other neded areas and that's the challenge we face. i would like to work with the supporters of the harbor maintenance trust fund to address this issue and it's an
issue created by us but address this issue so the funds we collect in the trust fund can actually go out and expect what we expect them to do. i appreciate the gentlelady from california and the gentleman from michigan that are interested. and i should mention the gentleman from louisiana who has been an advocate for many years, mr. boustany, but i thank you for working on this to try to address this to get up to the target. the other thing is, it was said that we didn't reach the target on this. while it depends on how you look at it, there are other purposes for which the hash oish maintenance trust fund is spent, st. lawrence seaway and one of the others in border security and stuff. so if you count those in the total spending, it probably does come close to reaching the target as long as those committees appropriate what was
requested. i don't know whether they will or not, but if they do. but i think working in a bipartisan way, we have come up with the best we can do to address this and i know it is a of high importance to all members of congress. i thank the gentlelady and gentleman for working with the committee and i yield back. the chair: anyone else seeking recognition? question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: page 4, line 24, after the dollar amount insert increased by 4500,000. the chair: pursuant to house
resolution the gentleman from south carolina and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina. >> mr. chairman, so many things we do here in washington are nonsensical. our tax system is not competitive. our immigration system is not competitive. our regulatory system is not competitive. and our infrastructure is deteriorating. and our ports are certainly a very very critical part of our infrastructure. when we have a situation where it takes 15 years-plus to get environmental permitting done for the port everglades. miss rice: fourth year of studying the charleston port one of the most efficient ports on the east coast and 10 years since we have had dredging funds for the small port of georgetown
in our district. our infrastructure continues to deteriorate and the country becomes less competitive and thousands more american jobs are lost. with limited funds it is increasingly difficult for small harbors to compete with larger projects. given this competition for scarce funds, very few small projects makes the president's budget and receives funding. what my amendment does is to remove $4.5 million from the army corps' regulatory budget, which the regulatory division of the army corps of engineers continues to grow and proposal you will debate more regulations that make our country even less competitive such as the expansion of the clean water act that are currently proposed, this would take money from that regulatory division and put it into the operating and
maintenance division so that these monies can be used to actually make our ports work again. the bottom line is, our harbors are showing, we need to increase money to maintenance accounts so that our harbors can compete. in my district the port of georgetown has not received maintenance dredging in over a decade. this is a port that handled 1.7 million tons of cargo. the economy is largely dependent on the port and the port is getting more and more shallow each year. the state of south carolina has pledged $18 million for port dredging. the ports authority in south carolina has pledged $5 million and the voters have passed a referendum that will will apply $6 million to dredge the harbor. georgetown is waiting for the
president or the army corps of engineers to realize its importance and fund the federal portion of this project. it is vitally important for the corps' maintenance account to be sufficient which is why my amendment transfers $4.5 million from regulatory activities to maintaining our harbors. thank you and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. anyone seeking time? the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. miss rice: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. -- >> i reserve. mr. simpson: i claim time in opposition. my understanding that the gentleman going to withdraw the amendment? >> i
>> i will withdraw my amendment. mr. simpson: this house adopted an amendment from our colleague from michigan, mr. huizenga, to meet the annual targets set for the water resources development act of 2014. we hit the target we all agreed to. additionally while i take issue with some of the regulatory change this is administration is pursuing the corps does not funding for processing permits in a timely manner. the law already eliminates funding, we don't want to slow down other activities. for these reasons i oppose the gentleman's amendment. i certainly understand his concern and desire with this amendment. >> thank you, mr. simpson.
formerly utilized sites remedial action program. $104 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk 04. -- 047. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar of arizona, page 6, line 6, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $424,000, page 28, line 13 after the dollar amount, insert increased by $424,000. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223 the gentleman from arizona and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from arizona. mr. gosar: i offer an amendment which seeks to ensure adequate resources. as a member of the house government and oversight reform
committee i'm a believer in oversight. the more sunlight on laws the more clear it will be. the i.g. has saved taxpayers into -- millions of dollars and has uncovered countless examples of wrongdoing in the federal government. i just read a g.a.o. investigation report yesterday that found that loans currently in the department of energy portfolio are expected to cost the taxpayers more than $2.2 billion. the report went on to state that $807 million of the $2.2 billion is a result of bad loans that have defaulted. in fact, five major d.o.e. loans have defaulted from the agent's 2014 portfolio. the report noted that the cost to the tax payers from these fraud loans could even exceed the $2.2 billion estimated figure and i quote, the final credit subsidy cost of a fwiven loan or loan guarantee will not be known until the life of the
loan is complete. both d.o.e. loan programs can expose the government and tax payers to substantial financial risk if borrowers default. further this committee noted in the committee report accompanying this bill that, and i quote, the committee is also concerned that the department is failing in its responsibility to ensure that d.o.e. contracts which incurred cost valued at billions of $s per year are audited in a timely manner. clearly there's a lack of oversight and accountability within d.o.e. that needs to change. it is the responsibility of the d.o.e. inspector general to report to congress on these issues to rectify these problems and ensure taxpayers aren't exposed to another solyndra. i applaud going above and beyond last year's enacted levels. let's give the inspector general's office the resources it needs. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
patsdzage of this commonsense amendment and i reserve. choi the gentleman reserves. anyone seeking time? the gentleman from arizona. mr. gosar: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment of the gentleman from arizona. peapea -- those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 6 line formerly utilized site rerks medial action program, $104 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. mcclintock of california, page 6, line 12 after the dollar amount insert reduced by $2,500,000. page 2 rks line five, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $400,000. page 22, line three after the dollar amount insert reduced by $22,661,000. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition?
mr. simpson: i reserve a point of border -- of order. the chair: the point of order are se reserved. the clerk will continue. the clerk: page 24 line , after the dollar amount insert reduced by $227,000. page 25, line five after the dollar amount insert reduced by $32,262,000. page 25 line 25, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $18,000. page 27, line 7 after the dollar amount insert reduced by $200. page 27, line 13, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $5,119,000. page 35, line 17, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $1,632,000. page 49 line 22, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $5 million. page 51, line 24, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $23,101,000. page 57, line 11 after the
dollar amount insert increased by $128,920,000. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 2 23, the gentleman from california and a member opposed each will control five minutes this echair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> this amendment seeks to freeze funds for organizations that lapsed decades ago. mr. mcclintock since 1945, the -- mr. mcclintock: since 1945, the rules of the house has prohibited spending for any program not authorized. but we do. it can't be enforced. the bill before us contains $25 billion in unauthorized spending
for programs that have not been reviewed by the thordsing committees since as far back as 1980, jimmy carter's last year in office. i'm sure some, even many of these programs are valuable and worthy of taxpayer dollars. but surely others are not. the fact that they have not been authorized in as much as 35 years ought to warn us to be at least a little more careful in continuing to fund them. rather than reviewing our spending decisions and making tough choices about spending priorities, congress simply rubber stamps these programs out of habit, year after year. it's no wonder we are so deeply in debt with so little to show for it. my amendment does not -- does not defund these unauthorized programs as the house rules rile. it simply freezes spending on them at last year's level. the cuts contained in this amendment total $129,000,000. or about .36 of 1% of the total
spending in this bill. this house has a responsibility to examine these programs, re-authorize the ones that work and modify or end the ones that don't. it has a responsibility but it has no incentive as long as we keep funding them and worse increasing the funding that these programs receive. so in a sense, this is a token. it's a symbol resm deucing this bill by .36 of 1% will have no appreciable effect on the $35.5 billion in this appropriation or the $3.8 trillion the federal government plans to spend this year. but i hope that it will send a subtle but clear message that the members of this house insist that the congress reassert its constitutional responsibility to authorize federal spending and to enforce its own rules that
prohibit spending blindly on unauthorized programs. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman -- who seeks recognition? the gentleman from idaho is recognized. mr. simpson: i continue to reserve my point of order. the chair: the gentleman's point of order is reserved. mr. simpson: i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes in opposition. mr. simpson: though i have to tell you i understand what he's trying to do and i agree with him in my ways. but when he says we have to observe the rules of the house, the rules of the house also allow for the rules committee to write a rule that overrides the rules of the house. if it's approved by the majority, that's what happens. so we are following the rules of the house. but he races a point that's of concern and should be. when i was chairman of the interior committee, we tried to defund the endangered species act and designations of critical
habitat because the endangered species act had not been re-authorized for something like 23 or 26 years. we lost an amendment on the floor to put the money back into it. but we were trying to make a point. and that is, and i was supported by the chairman of the resources committee. we were trying to make the point that the authorizing committees need to bet busy and do their job. i fully believe that. that was eight years ago. we still haven't done anything to re-authorize the endangered species act and the chairman at that time supported what we were trying to do. and i haven't seen any re-authorization bills come out. now if you look at what's not authorized in the federal government right now, or where authorizations have expired, i think there's a reason for an expiration date. it's so you go in and review the program, look at the needs, is
it still there? can we do it better? do we need to make changes? is there justification for the program? the problem is, the authorizing committees have failed in many respects in that responsibility. if we were to simply defund everything we're -- everything where authorizations have expired, i think the department of state authorization has expired. not sure we want to defund the department of state. some people might want to. but there's an awful lot of -- i think most senior programs the authorizations have expired. and you can go through the list system of while the gentleman raises a very valid point and one that i would like to help work with him on trying to address the appropriations committee is trying to do our job of oversight. that's why we have hearings.
is it the best place to do oversight of the need for the programs? we do oversight on how the money is spent and so forth but the authorizing committee is the best place to lock at the programs and see in their totality if they're still needed or not. so while i sympathize i know that's not what the gentleman from california wants while i sympathize with what the gentleman is trying to do and even agree with what he's trying to do, i have to rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment. but i thank him for bringing a very important subject to this floor. and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from ohio. ms. kaptur: i rise to oppose the amendment. the chair: does the gentlelady wish to strike the last word? ms. kaptur: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized.
ms. kaptur: i, as well as the chairman, appreciate the gentleman coming to the floor and pointing out some of the inadequacies of process here but i just wanted to state for the record that a couple of the items that the gentleman targets, i think would do damage to the country. for example, the accounts that deal with cleaning up the cold war legacy, for example. that means that communities across our country that sacrificed in the name of the country would have to wait even longer for resolution to the contamination that exists. it's astounding how much there is from coast to coast really when you start looking, you almost want to close the book. because there is so much. and i think that the communities that have been dealing with these remediation problems over the years would not appreciate the gentleman's amendment this evening. in addition to that, i wanted to say something about r.p. -- about arpa-e where we have
advanced energy research going on. you know, the united states is in the energy secure. -- is not energy secure. r.p.e. provides us with a real global advantage. we don't need to shave anything from r.p.e. because if i look at some of the competition coming at us from china and even coming in such as hacking into our intellectual property that many of our private companies hold, we view arpa-e. i think the gentleman is well intentioned in trying to have regular order. i wish that it all worked so perfectly but i don't think we should hurt companies because i think that's what would be done if the gentleman's amendment
were to pass. i wanted to put that on the record and rise in opposition. i respect the gentleman for coming down and trying to perfect the way we conduct affairs of the nation. i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. mcclintock: this frees funding at last year's level until the authorizing committees sit down and review them and revise them. nor is anything in this affected by this freeze. i appreciate my friend from idaho's sympathy but i would trade it for his support. and i would point out that this amendment, the whole point of this amendment that authorizing committees have got to review,
re-authorize, revise or repeal these measures. they have got to do one of those things, but why should they -- why would they want to go to all of the fuss and bother of reviewing these programs tasking on entrenched interests, asking hard questions making people cranky in the process, when all they have to do under our current practice is sit there and do absolutely nothing and the funding just like the mighty mississippi, just keeps rolling along. we cannot continue down this course responsibly. we have a responsibility to the american people to do that heavy lifting, to go through these programs with a fine-toothed comb and make the revisions that are necessary according to our own experience and in the most important mandate this congress has been given to stop wasting people's money.
this measure is a very small step. to suggest it's going to have dire consequences, cutting .36 of 1% is a measure of out of control our thinking on spending has gone. so with that, mr. chairman, i would ask for this single token that we take a stand and at least freeze the unauthorized spending. the chair: the gentleman from idaho. mr. simpson: how much time do i have left? the chair: gentleman has two minutes. mr. simpson: i thank the gentleman for his comments and for his proposing this amendment. and i withdraw my point of order. and oppose the gentleman's amendment. i would hate to get the idea when he says stop wasting taxpayer money, that just because we are funding these programs that haven't been re-authorized that we are
wasting taxpayer money. we actually look at these programs very deeply when we do the appropriations process. and in fact, i wouldn't want to suggest to the american people that we alimb nature any program whose funds vr expired or whose need was hundred out. when i was chairman of the interior committee, we eliminated 59 programs. it's not we continue to fund things but we do look at the programs rnings the need for the -- the programs, the need for the programs and i fully agree with the gentleman to change this so the authorizing committees can do there or will do their appropriations or their authorization' work. but the appropriations committee holds probably more hearings than any other committee in this body. and looks at these programs very deeply and there may be differences about what's necessary and what's appropriate
for funding between members of this body. but what we come out with is a bill that i think the majority of the members of this body can support. so i look forward to working with the gentleman from california to try to address what is a real problem that he brings up and i would hope my colleagues would oppose this amendment. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. for what purpose does the gentleman from california soak recognition? mr. mcclintock: i request a recorded vote. the chair: further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 6, line 13, coastal emergencies $34 million. expenses $180 million to remain available until september 30 2017.
office of the assistant secretary of the army for civil works, $4,450,000 to remain available until september 30, 2017. general provisions, corps of engineers civil, section 101, none of the funds shall be available through a reprogramming of funds that creates or initiates a new program. section 102, none of the funds may be used to reward any contract that commits funds beyond the amounts appropriated for that program. section 103, the secretary may transfer to the fish and wildlife service up to $4. none of the funds may be used by the corps of engineers to develop or enforce any change through regulations pertaining to the definitions -- >> i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. beyer of virginia.
the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. beyer: section 104 would prevent the army corps of engineers from updating regulations pertaining to the definitions of fill material or discharge of fill material for purposes of the clean water act. when congress first enacted the clean water act and 35 years the law kept america's lakes, rivers and streams safe, protecting our wildlife and drinking water. that is no longer the case today. my amendment would remove this anti-clean water act rider. when congress first enacted the clean water act the 404 permit process was supposed to be used for certain construction projects like bridges and roads and raising the bottom elevation of a water body and converting it into dry land.
under a 2002 rule change, it was broadened to include rock, soil, clay plastics construction debris and wood chips and ex caffings activities. it would remove language previously excluded, waste discharges from section 404 jurisdiction. the change allows the use of 404 permits to allow certain discharges that harm the aquatic environment. the guidelines are not well suited for evaluating the effects of discharging hazardous waste and similar materials into a water body or wetland. in sum the net effect of the 2002 rule change was to alter the permit process in ways that congress never intended. it wasn't the intent to allow similar material some of it as hazardous and therefore bypass a
review and meet pollution standards. downstream water users have every right to be concerned that the section 404 process failed them to protect them from the discharge of hazardous discharges. a permit allows the discharge of toxic waste water from a gold processing mill and go untreated into the lake despite the discharge violates e.p.a. standards for the mining industry. mining waste can contain toxic chemicals known to pose risks. this is dangerous and irresponsible. e.p.a. estimates that 120 miles per year of headwater streams are buried with chem kale-laden discharges as a result of mining discharges. a study found evidence that mining activities can have extreme effects on a stream. that same study that nine out of
every 10 streams were impaired based on assessments of aquatic life. this provision is a preempttive strike against protecting our drinking water. and since there is no time limit, it would not only block future administrations from considering changes. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment and strike this from the bill. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. simpson: i claim time in opposition. i thank the gentleman from virginia. it seems like old times that you just change your appearance. mr. moran and i, the colleague before you we had this discussion many times on the clean water act and waters of the united states and fill material and so forth. seems like you just look differently than he used to. mr. chairman, i rise in
opposition to this amendment. the language in the bill is intended to maintain the status quo as to what is fill material in purposes of the clean water act. the existing definition was put in place through rulemaking put in place by the clinton administration. the rule alliance the definitions on the books of the corps and the e.p.a. so that both agencies will be working with the same definition. changing the definition again as somehow proposed could kill mining operations across this country. for that reason, i support the underlying language in the bill and i oppose this amendment. i reserve. any others seeking time? the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it and the amendment is not agreed to. the clerk will read.
the clerk: page 10 line 19 section 105 -- for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. beyer of virginia. strike section 105. chirment the gentleman from virginia and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. beyer: section 105 would prevent the army corps of engineers from finalizing its limits of federal jurisdiction under the clean water act. this language is not new. we have seen it here a number of times. the difference is that the conversation has progressed and everyone agrees that clarity is needed. calls for the e.p.a. to issue a rule came from notable organizations such as the national cattle beef association, western business round table and national association of manufacturers.
prohibiting e.p.a. from finalizing the rule would perpetrate this confusion and there are countless cases that reiterate this point. the e.p.a. acknowledged a case in which storm water from construction sites carried pollutants into the san pedro river which is a river ecosystem supporting diverse wildlife but the waters only flow for part of the year. the agency stated it had to discontinue all enforcement cases because it was so costly to prove. we need to end the confusion and through a public comment process and appropriate congressional oversight allow the administration to move forward and complete a formal rulemaking. the proponents, it has been said it is they have it wrong. and agricultural discharges in waters, identifies specific type
of water bodies to which it does not apply, artificial lakes and ponds and irrigation ditches. it does not extend federal protection not historically protected and fully consistent with the law and decisions of the supreme court. the administration is a strong commonsense plan to make clean water a priority by protecting the drinking water for 117 million americans. if congress blocks the proposal 20 acres of wetlands will be at risk and this will impact the small businesses and communities that rely on clean water. american businesses need to know when the federal government has authority and when it doesn't. and businesses will not know when they need army corps of engineers' permits. this will subject them to civil and criminal liability. the clean water rule will largely restore but not expand historic coverage of the clean
water act and no direct cost to the public. e.p.a. estimates it will provide $514 million annually. updating the rules is essential. we need to allow the e.p.a. and the corps to do their job and clarify their rules and guidance. if they fail to do it, more lawsuits will ensue. these anti-clean water act riders and states that have conflicting policies or no policies at all. a time when rivers were so polluted that it afpblgted downstream states. today we have clean water because of the clean water act. i urge my colleagues to support this clean water rider and support this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. simpson: i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is
recognized for five minutes. mr. simpson: last year the congress proposed a rule to expand jurisdiction over the clean water act to include waters --. many people believed in waters were unregulated by the clean water act that they were unregulated. not true, they were regulated by the states. there became a question of clean water act, under navigable waters what did that mean? does it mean navigable by steam shipe? by boat? canoe? inner tube? and the court said you need to clarify this. the e.p.a. said we can clarify that. we'll just control all the waters. and take them out of state control. i think that's a problem. i can tell you it's a real problem for states in the west, particularly. the administration's proposed rule is inconsistent with two
separate supreme court decisions that clearly said that the corps of engineers and the environmental protection agency had gone too far and that federal jurisdiction under the clean water act was not as broad as they had claimed. deciding how water is used should be the responsibility of state and local officials who are familiar with people. under the rule provided by the e.p.a. and army corps of engineers they are saying intermittent streams. that means streams that don't have water running in them but maybe a month or two a year. now fall under their jures diction. under the connectivity rule, which is what this is, the hipbone is connected to the leg bone, connected to the knee bone sort of thing. you should the connectivity rule while they say this is not their intent there's no way you cannot eventually say that we're going to control groundwater also. not just surface water but
groundwater also. because it's kecked to surface water also. so while there may be a desire for clarity on the issue of federal jurisdiction, providing clarity does not trump the need to stay within the limits of the law. the proposed rule would expand federal jurisdiction far beyond what was ever intended by the clean water act, the provision in the energy and water bill doesn't weaken the clean water act, it stops the administration from expanding federal jurisdiction. for those reasons i strongly oppose this amendment and urge my colleagues to vote no and reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman has the only time left. does the gentleman -- the gentleman yields back. anyone else seeking time? the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chairs, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. clerk will read. the clerk: page 11, line 6, section 106, none of the funds may be used to require permit
for the discharge or dredge fill material under the federal water pollution control act. section 107, the secretary shall not promulgate any regulation that prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm at a water resources development project. section 108, no funds shall be used for open lake placement alternative for the disposal of dredge material originating from lake erie. title 2, department of interior central utah project. central utah project completion account $9,874,000. bureau of reclamation, shall be expended for the bureau of reclamation. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. ruiz of california. page 13, line 14, after the
dollar amount insert increased by $20 million. page 32, line 2 insert reduced $20 million. the chair: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. ruiz: i would like to chang chairman simpson and ms. kaptur for their work on this bill. i rise to offer an amendment to h.r. 2028, the energy and water appropriations act that provides additional critical resources for the bureau of reclamation to undertake projects that address historic and severe drought conditions across the west. one of the worst droughts in modern history is choking our fragile economic recovery and placing our water supply in unprecedented jeopardy. last year, more than 60% of the contiguous united states suffered drought conditions and the west continues to bear the brunt of this burden. in the olympic mountains of
northwest washington state, the know pack contained just 7% of the average. in california, the drought is the worst to hit the state since recordkeeping started in 1895. 2013 was the driest year on record and 2014 was the hottest. the impacts of the severe drought are harsh and far-reaching, threatening public health, degrading the environment increasing the risk of wild fires and hampering a wide range of industries. in 2012 california's agriculture industry contributed over $45 billion to the united states economy. last year, because of the drought, hundreds of thousands of acres were left to fallow because sufficient water was unavailable. according to a university of california study, this caused the -- cost the state $.2 billion in direct economic output and the devastating loss of 17,100 seasonal and part-time
jobs. these effects will be felt by americans across the country. this year the price of fruits and vedgeable -- vegetables expected to rise 3% in part due to severe drought conditions in california. furthermore continuing to draw down ground water supplies in california will have a dangerous public health impact in rural communities where residents relie on wells for drinking water reduced ground water levels result in higher concentration of contaminants including dangerous nitrate and ars neck. stagnant pools have also created breeding grounds for mosquitoes. the california department of public health announced in april that the state had a record breaking number of deaths related to mosquito-borne west nile virus in 2014. in addition to west nile, the arid conditions could increase the number of case of valley fever a potentially fatal disease called -- caused by a
fungus that can grow in the soil and become airborne if the soil dries out. while the majority of people exposed to the spores do not exhibit symptoms, people who start to develop disease can have coughs, fever, headaches and in rare cases it can lead to death. it is time for action at all levels of government to address dangerous economic and public health impacts of ignoring this drought. back home in the southern california desert, local water agencies are working to help residents, businesses and municipalities convert their lawns and landscaping into water, fish -- water efficient desert landscapes. at the federal level the bureau of reclamation is investing in partnerships to improve delivery of water for users allowing them to invest more in water efficient irrigation techniques such as drip irrigation. the bureau can also help communities whose wells have run
dry due to excess i groundwater pumping, install relief wells that provide in some cases the only source of fresh water for an entire town. through one of the most successful water conservation grant programs, the water smart program the bureau has helped local water agencies tribal governments, irrigation districts and state agencies implement water conservation techniques that have conserved over 860000 acre-feet of water since 2009. for these reasons, mr. chairman my amendment would simply shift funding away from taxpayer fossil fuel research that benefits the wealthiest oil companies that can pay for research themselves an redirect it toward critical bureau of reclamation activities to address the impact of this devastating drought and mitigate future droughts. we must put the american economy, our constituents and the public's health above
politics and big oil. i urge my colleagues to come together to support my amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? >> i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes in opposition. mr. simpson: i rise in opposition to the amendment. i understand the gentleman seeks to show support for adegreesal funding for projects that are drought related in california and other places. but we must be mindful of the balancing and competing priorities across this bill. the gentleman would take $20 million out of the fossil energy account. as i said before, fossil fuels such as coal, oil, natural gas provide nearly 85% of the energy used by the nation's homes and businesses and will continue to provide for the majority of our energy needs for the foreseeable future. the bill rejects the administration's proposed reductions to fossil energy and instead funds these programs at $605 million, $34 million above last year.
with this additional fund, the office of fs ill energy will research how heat can be more efficiently converted into electricity and -- in a cross cutting effort with the nuclear and solar programs how water can be more efficiently used in power plants and how coal can be used to produce electric power through fuel cells this would reduce funding for a program to ensure we use our nation's abundant fossil fuel resources as well and cleanly as possible. i must oppose the amendment and urge other members to do so and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from california. rue -- mr. ruiz: i urge my colleagues to come together in a bipartisan fashion and support my amendment to ensure essential resources to keep mesh made food on the table and prevent a dangerous rise in food prices across the country. again, just taking money from
taxpayer subsidized research that they can afford on their own and put it into combating drought. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired this egentleman from idaho. the gentleman yields back. anyone else seeking time? the question -- the gentleman from colorado. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the amendment -- pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceed option the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. tipton soft colorado. page 13, line 14, after the dollar amount instert increase by $2 million. page 27, line 13rks insert reduce by $2 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223, the gentleman from colorado and a member opposed each will control five
minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. mr. tipson: i would like to thank chairman simpson and ranking member kaptur for their collaborative effort in bringing together this bill. chairman simpson, i appreciate your support of my amendment last year, programming funds within the water conservancy delivery fund to advance and complete ongoing water to provide delivery of clean drinking watter from a reclamation project as authorized by congress in 1962. mr. chairman, water is life and critical to the vitality of our communities and economies. today i'm offering a simple amendment to bolster the bureau of reclamation by $2 million allowing the bureau of reclamation to proceed with ongoing work in supply delivery projects to reach our shared goals in meeting demands by developing and maximizing clean water supplies. in colorado as is the case throughout the west we have
similar needs to be able to move forward with engineering design work and authorized features of existing reclamation promingtses. they improve water supply quality, address water shortage issues improve conservation measures and stabilize water supplies. in the western united states, water is an economic driver. in order to atrack more economic growth. every person in the west is dependent on water supply. this will increase funding to continue with these types of projects while simultaneously improving public health and protecting the environme these projects are critically important in drought years so the water is appropriately allocated for municipal and agricultural uses. the bureau's budget has been used for the central valley prgt, the yakima state basin project, the arkansas valley in colorado, and the project in the
chairman's home state of idaho. it is our hope that this amendment gives the bureau of reclamation the resources it needs to resolve water shortage issues in the west while enhancing regional development and promoting job growth. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i would like to yield two minutes to the co-author of the amendment, the gentleman from colorado. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. buck: we have a history of borrowing. we have borrowed for building roads and space programs and we are borrowing from the future. we have $18 trillion and we'll add to that debt this year. this project was authorized in 1962 and required more recently by the e.p.a.'s interpretation of the clean water act. we have 0 communities in southeast cole who are in violation of the clean water act because of naturally-occurring
elements. this amendment offers those communities a future. if we have to incur debt let it be as an investment in our children's future. i yield back. mr. tipton: i yield my time to chairman simpson. mr. simpson: i thank them for bringing this issue before the committee and have no objection and happy to accept it. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the opinion, the amendment is passed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 14, line 12, central valley project restoration funds, $49 million. california bay delta restoration $37 million. policy and administration, 59 million. administrative provision, appropriations shall be available for purchase of five passenger motor vehicles,
general provisions, department of the interior, section 201, none of the funds shall be available for a reprogramming of the funds that create or initiate the new program activity. section 202, none of the funds may be used to determine the final point of discharge for the interceptor drain for the st. louis unit development of a plan. section 203, the secretary shall complete the feasibility studies. title 3, the department of energy, energy programs, energy efficiency and renewable energy $1 billion -- the chair: the clerk will suspend. >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. griffith of virginia, page 21, line 5 after the dollar amount reduce by $50 million,
page 22 line 15, increase by $50 million. the chair: the gentleman from virginia and a member opposed each will control five minutes. >> over the past six years the policy has been a war on coal and left areas like virginia's 9th district economically devastated and has put our access to reliable affordable electricity in jeopardy. the onslaught of burdensome unreasonable regulations on coal-fired power plants is continuing in the president's clean power plan. states must come up with a plan for co-2 in 13 months after the final rules are released. that state plan is then to begin by 2020 and completed by 2030. there are a number of clean coal technologies currently in
development. but according to the testimony from the department of energy, these new technologies are not likely to be ready for prime time until 2025. that's nine years after the states have to come up with a plan and five years after the states have to begin implementing that plan and halfway through the time to come into compliance. this is not right. if we are to avoid rolling brownouts, coal will have to be continued to be used. but if we don't action, it will be illegal to use coal. while i fight and will continue to fight for more reasonable regulations we must take action to assure we can still use coal should the next administration also be unreasonable and anti-coal. to bend the curve of the development and bring the new coal technologies to market, we must spend some money. my amendment will add $50
million for research and development from energy research for aiding the development of these new clean coal technologies so we can have reliable and affordable technology. we have to make sure we have access to the new technologies in a timely fashion so they can meet these extremely burdensome regulations. i appreciate that the underlying bill provides a 6% increase in fossil fuel energy research. however, when districts like mine are seeing mine after mine shut down and power plants shut down because of numerous regulations on coal, it is clear that more needs to be done. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady -- for what purpose does -- ms. kaptur: move to strike the last word. i rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized in opposition. ms. kaptur: i rise to oppose the
gentleman from virginia's amendment. perhaps he doesn't have the full numbers, but the figure we had -- we add -- had a request from the administration and we actually increased the administration's request by $45 million to a level of $605 million for fossil energy research which is more than we spent in this fiscal year. we are spending $571 million. i would say the fossil energy accounts have been well provided for and i also want to say to the gentleman, you're taking the funds from the efficient -- energy efficiency and renewable energy account, and that account is not above last year if $266 million below last year. and what is in the account what
remains there is focused on american manufacturing, which is important in virginia. and vehicle technology, which are really not partisan interests. and my own view is that if you were to take the amount of funds that you you are proposing out of the energy efficiency and renewable energy account you would decimate these programs and further erode manufacturing, which has taken such big hits. let me mention since 2003, our country has spent $2.3 trillion importing foreign petroleum. vast amounts abroad and squellches thousands upon thousands of jobs. a diverse energy portfolio is necessary to eliminate our reliance on imported energy and we need an all of the above strategy. our bill provides that not just
in terms of fossil energy but renewable energy. we should be leading investment in these technologies across the board and expanding jobs in our country. though i appreciate the gentleman's interest and i know virginia has coal deposits, so does ohio but i really feel that the bill that we have worked out on a bipartisan basis provides very, very well for fossil energy, certainly better than the energy efficiency and renewable energy accounts fared and i would oppose the amendment and i would ask my colleagues to do the same. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from virginia. mr. griffith: i yield to the chairman. mr. simpson: my colleague's amendment would increase funding for the program and decrease era account by the same amount. i appreciate my colleague's
concern to protect the fossil industry from overreach. this amendment would advance research and development allowing for rebus utilization of abundant natural resources. i support the amendment and i urge members to do the same. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. griffith: using the remainder of my time, i would have to say i appreciate the gentlelady's comments and appreciate the chairman's support. the bottom line is that we are losing thousands of jobs in the central appalachia region and in a recent article, a thousand jobs have been lost in the last year alone in the coal fields. that is one concern. we are shutting down this month several coal-fired power plants in my district and we are going to have serious problems if we don't do something.
we have to help the industry. we have to help make sure that we are burning the coal in a clean manner and this is the way to do it. i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the gentlelady from ohio. ms. kaptur: i would like on that vote to have a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from virginia is postponed. ms. castor: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by ms. castor, page 21 line 5 insert increase by 66 million. page 22 line 20, after the dollar amount insert reduced by $355 million. exarmente the gentlelady from florida and a member opposed
each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. ms. castor: my amendment increases the energy efficiency and renewable account by $266 million. to simply restore it to last year's level with an offset from the fossil energy account. my amendment will boost energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives across america that have a proven return on investment for taxpayers. and this amendment is paid for by reducing, but not eliminating accounts that do not have the same return on investments for taxpayers. unless we adopt this amendment, america's commitment to energy efficiency will be slashed by $266 million below the 2015 enacted level and over $1 billion below the budget request. now, mr. chairman, i wish we could meet the budget request this year, but that doesn't
appear possible, but we should at least restore money back to last year's level, which is still a modest investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy for america. investments in energy efficiency create jobs and help make our businesses more competitive compared to businesses across the globe. in addition to energy efficiency, reduces costs to consumers and wouldn't that be revolutionary that we put money in the pockets of our neighbors back home. the amounts proposed in the republican bill is so low that america will have to reduce the number of research, development and demonstration projects with universities and our national labs. and america should be a leader in innovation and technological advancement but instead the republican bill says america should take a back seat. america should take a back seat to no one.
we are in the midst of a technological revolution when it comes to energy. look at what is happening. we have an incredibly diverse energy portfolio and growing clean energy sector this is especially important as we tackle the challenges of the changing climate. yet the republican bill reduces investments in solar energy technology and r&d by $81 million or 35% from last year. that means the department of energy's exciting sunshot goal of having solar electricity without subsidies by 2020 will be delayed for years. that is extremely detrimental to u.s. solar industries and the jobs it creates that currently employ over 174,000 americans. it will send a signal to the chinese and foreign competitors
that we are ceding this industry to them. it will have a significant reduction in the national labs, including the national renewable industry lab and sandia in a national labs. it would drop job training for students and military veterans at 420 community colleges across 49 states. this network has been a critical source of trained employees in an industry that is growing and is expected to grow even more with over 200,000 by the end of 2015. the recently pilotted solar ready veterans program would be at risk. and the planned expansion from three to 10 military bases would be affected and canceled. veterans currently make up 10% of the solar industry. if we do not unleash american
ingenuity now, we will face the increased cost of the chaking climate such as increases in property and flood insurance. all of this from extreme weather events increased property taxes from having to protect infrastructure. let's invest in america. my amendment shifts a little bit not all, from older technologies into cutting-edge energy efficiency and clean energy that are so vital to america's appreciate. i appreciate ranking member member's vision. we are talking about american jobs and american manufacturing and i appreciate her work and i appreciate chairman simpson's work. i ask for an aye vote on the castor amendment. and i reserve. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. mr. simpson: i rise in opposition to the amendment. .
mr. simpson: the gentlelady says we should invest. we are investing. this would increase funding for renewable energy by $266 million, restoring it to last year's level by using the fossil fuel account as an offset. this year the funding is $266 million below last year -- billion below last year and $1.1 billion below requests. it's focused on helping american manufactures compete in the global marketplace and supporting basic research into renewable energy sources. these are areas with broad bipartisan support. the house recommendation for this year was the result of a focused effort to ensure taxpayer funds are spent on the most advanced research projects within these priorities. increasing funding for eere strikes the wrong balance when considering the nation's
electricity needs. fossil fuels such as coal, oil and natural gas provide the vast majority of the energy used by the nation's homes and businesses and will continue to provide our energy needs for the foreseeable future. for example fossil fuels produce nearly 11 times more electricity than renewable energy fuel sources. i'm not against renewable energy. i think they're an important part of the mix. they're cute. but they don't provide the majority of energy that's needed in this country. this amendment would decimate funding for a program that ensures we use our nation's fossil fuel resources as well and cleanly as possible. therefore i must oppose the gentlelady's amendment. the chair: the gentleman -- the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from florida. ms. castor: thank you mr. chairman. i would say that the burgeoning jobs being created in american manufacturing and energy efficiency and renewable frge are more than just cute.
they are the jobs of the future in america. a clean energy future. i urge my colleagues to adopt the castor amendment, vote for america, vote for american jobs and vote for the future. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from idaho. mr. simpson: i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlelady from florida. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i rise in support of my amendment. the chair: the gentleman from colorado. the chair recognizes the gentleman from colorado. >> mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. lamb born of colorado, page 21, line five after the dollar amount insert reduce by $4 million. increase by $4 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223, the gentleman from colorado is recognized and a member opposed eachle with elect niced for five minutes.
the gentleman from colorado. mr. lamborn: the purpose of this amendment is to increase funding for the u.s.-israel energy cooperation program from $2 million to $4 million. this critical program allows companies across the u.s. to develop cut edge technology with new partners in israel to advance america's energy goal. the cooperative agreement facilitates greater cooperation and sharing of knowledge between american and israeli universities on alternative energy. collaboration between the american and israeli private sector and academia will enhance u.s. efforts to develop alternative technologies an increase energy efficiency. to the benefit of our national security our economy and the environment. let me be clear, this is not an aid program but instead a cooperative agreement designed to connect the u.s. and israeli private sectors in the development of innovative technologies to strengthen our energy security and independence.
re-authorized in 2014 through 2024, the cooperative energy program mandate was expanded to cover collaborative research and development into renewable technologies, natural gas and water. key areas of interest for the united states. the program is also designed to leverage matching contributions from both the israeli and american private sectors. thus for every dollar congress appropriates, $3 are invested. contributing to our economy in addition to our energy security. the program has already leveraged over $27 million in private sector investment. this is an excellent way to leverage a modest investment into critical energy innovations to the benefit of both countries. i encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment to make a greater investment in america's and israel's energy future and to support an important bilateral energy cooperation agreement with one of our nation's closest allies. mr. chairman i reserve the
balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. any member seeking time? the gentleman is recognized. mr. lamborn: i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from colorado. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. swalwell of california. page 21, line five after the dollar amount insert increase by $21,505,000. page 22, line 0 after the dollar amount insert reduced by $34 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 223, the gentleman from california and a member opposed each control five minutes. mr. wall swel: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of my amendment which i offer along
with representatives perlmutter, polis welch tonko matsui and connolly which would cut the increase provided to the fossil energy resource account back to its fiscal year 2015 level and put that money toward the energy efficiency eere account. my amendment presents a question for the congress this evening. are we going to invest in the future of energy or are we going to continue to look backwards. we are certainly an all of the above country when it comes to where we get our energy. however that does not mean we have to be an all of the above country when it comes to how we spend our federal research dollars. for decades we have relied on fossil fuels, fuels that dirty our environment, are fundamentally changing our environment and keep us dependent on foreign sources of energy and are a finite resource. this is not sustainable over the long-term. energy that's clean and
renewable is where our future lies. to put this in perspective, this budget proposes to cut the investment in renewable energy by $266 million from last year and increase investments in fossil fuel by $34 million. my colleagues on the other side often ask, why can't we run government like a business? this would be similar to a business cutting its cell phone, iphone laptop, ipad budget and increasing its pager and land line budget. it's time that we start running government like a business and make an investment in renewable energy because they'll pay off for our future and also for health and jobs that will be created around them. young people understand this choice well. i have the opportunity to lead a
group in the congress called future forum and we've gone across the country from new york to boston to san francisco talking to young people about what issues matter to them. across the country, the issue is always the same. why can't this congress be more forward-looking as to where we get our energy? millenials know they're a generation who will be living with the consequences of the energy choices we make here today. it's their environment that will be damage. it's their climate that will be altered. and their energy choices that will be limited if we fail to invest in renewable clean sources of energy now. i know the budget is tight and we have to make difficult choices about thousand allocate scarce resources. and i understand and appreciate that some of the money supported by the fossil energy research and development account are seeking to improve how we use fossil fuels. but how can we take limited resources to increase spending in any way to support fossil fuels and encourage their use over fiscal year 2016 by $34 million while cut regular newble
energy by $266 million? this makes no sense. look at what other countries are doing. germany receives 30% of its energy from renewable sources. can we not do better than germany? the only way we can is if we invest in the future. we shouldn't be increasing funding to continue to use energy sources of the past. i urge all members to support my amendment to undo this increase and redirect that money toward supporting the energy of the future. renewable energy. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho seek recognition? mr. impson: rise in on -- mr. simpson: rise in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. simpson: this is the same debate we used on the other amendment. we're investing in what we use. 85% of the energy in this
country is fossil energy. we are the saudi arabia of coal why walk away from that? we can do it cleaner and more efficiently that's what we are investing in. we are still investing in renewable energies. it's not that we're just ignoring those other things. in fact we're investing $1.66 billion in those things. fossil energy that we news -- that we use much more than we do renewble, we're only investing $605 million. while eappreciate what the gentleman is trying to do, i think it would unbalance the bill and i urge rejection of his amendment. the chair: the gentleman re serves. the gentleman from california. i yield back --
>> i yield back and ask for a roll call vote. the chair: the gentleman from idaho. mr. simpson: yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. at this time the gentlelady is recognized. mr. swalwell: i ask for a roll call vote. the chair: further proceed option the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. perry of pennsylvania. page 1, line five, after the dollar amount inseert increase by $22 million. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 23, the gentleman and a member opposed will control five minutes. mr. perry: this amendment seeks to highlight the fact that the
water power program is vitally important to reducing our dependence on foreign oil. this bill the underlying bill, cuts hydropower by over $22 million. what the amendment i'm offering does is restore that funding and offsets it with department of energy administrative costs. the hydropower -- hydropower is the nation's most available, reliable affordable and sustainable energy source. requiring only the pow over moving water, rivers, streams, and ocean waves an tides, hydropower is domestic and renewable. hydropower is available in every region of the country. a range of technologies exists or are under development to tap the power of waves, tides and river flows. thousands of mega watts of potential are available from projects from new england to the west coast in alaska and from end river projects along the mississippi river and others. 2,200 hydropower plants provide
america's most abundant source of clean, renewable energy. the united states produces more electricity from hydropower than from any other renewable electricity sort source. it accounted for 56% of renewable in 2012 and 7% of the nation's overall electricity generation. new technology employed at existing hydrosites represents an opportunity for new sources of power by installing more efficient purr tine -- turbines and enhabsing performance, existing infrastructure can generate more power sustainably. harnessing more of this energy will create a truly renewable and green energy source. there are advantages over wind and solar. hide row has a predictable year-round power output while solar and wind can vary in some sareas and necessitate the use of large battery banks or alternate power sources. even routine maintenance on windmill can be difficult on top of a wind tower while hydropower
provides relatively low maintenance. hydropower facilities are quiet and can be made unon truce i while many people report that considerable noise is generated by wind power. hydropower also faces a comprehensive regulatory approval process. it involve taos many participants including ferc, the federal and state resource agencies, local governments tribes n.g.o.'s and the public. currently there are 60,000 mega watts of preliminary permits in frodgets -- projects awaiting final approval. of 80,000 total dams, 600 have immediate capability to produce i would like to high the loss and underu