For the week of May 31, 1999
VIEW THIS ON THE AMERICAN RIVERS WEBPAGE WITH DIRECT LINKS TO THE ACTUAL BILLS!! http://www.amrivers.org/policynew.html
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Despite sharp cuts to non-defense energy and water programs, the Senate Appropriations Committee pushed through its FY'00 spending bill for energy and water. The committee's bill would cut 302(b) non-defense programs by $490 million from the current funding level to $21.2 billion. Of the non-defense funds, $17.02 billion would go to the Department of Energy and $3.72 billion to the Army Corps of Engineers. The funding figure for the Corps is $182.6 million below the Clinton Administration's request for FY'00 and $374.1 million below the FY'99 allocation. The Senate also cut the budget for the Bureau of Reclamation, the water agency of the Department of Interior, scaling back the agency's funds to $756.2 ($100 million below the Administration's FY'00 request and $24 million below the FY'99 level).
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Due to pressure from budget caps, the House Appropriations Committee failed to push through its FY'00 spending bill for the Department of Agriculture.
Although many expected the bill to move easily, as it usually does, disputes over budget caps and hundreds of amendments stalled the measure on the floor. Of the bill's nearly $61 billion, USDA's conservation operations account was slated to receive $654 million.
In hopes of higher spending limits, the House Appropriations Interior Subcommittee may hold off on scheduling a mark-up of the Interior and related agencies funding measure for FY'00. Currently, the House 302(b) allocation for Interior and related agencies -- $11.341 billion - is $15 billion below the Clinton Administration's request. The Senate figure is $13.575 billion.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Both the Senate and House funding measures would drastically cut allocations to non-defense (302(b)) programs across the board, rolling many programs back to funding levels of ten to twenty years ago. [Note - unless otherwise noted, all figures are relative to FY'99 funding levels]
Overall, the House would slash allocations for priority domestic programs by 12% below their current levels. The House would cut funding for the Environmental Protection Agency by 9%, the Department of Interior (not including the Bureau of Reclamation) by 19%, the USDA Forest Service by 19%, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration by 12%. The House did not support the Administration's Lands Legacy Initiative, denying the Administration's request for $588 million for states to protect farmland, coastal areas, urban parks, and open space. The Environmental Quality Initiatives Program faces a cut of $26 million, 13% below FY'99 levels and $126 million below the Administration's FY'00 request. The Wetlands Reserve Program would be limited to 120,000 acres, 80,000 less than requested by the White House.
Cuts to environment-related programs are deep in the Senate 302(b) allocations as well. In addition to approving its FY'00 discretionary spending allocations, the Senate Appropriations Committee also created a new Deficiencies Subcommittee to find ways to redirect money already appropriated but not spent or find new resources all together to ease the strain on bills facing severe cuts. Appropriations Committee Chair Ted Stevens (R-AK), Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), and Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS) will sit on the new subcommittee. In the Senate, EPA funding would drop by 15%, DOI (not including the Bureau of Reclamation) by 1%, USDA Forest Service by 1%, and NOAA by 4%. Funds for the Columbia River Salmon Project would be cut by $30 million below the Administration's FY'00 request and 33% below FY'99 levels. The California Bay Delta Project would be cut by $45 million (47%) below the Administration's FY'00 request.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
Senate Discusses Targeted Endangered Species Bill:
In a hearing on May 27, the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Drinking Water discussed a bill aimed at narrowly amending the Endangered Species Act. The bill, S. 1100 introduced by Senators John Chafee (R-RI), Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Pete Domenici (R-NM), would reform the ESA requirements for developing recovery plans and designating critical habitat for species.
The legislation seeks to make designation of critical habitat a part of the federal agency planning process for recovering listed species. Currently, federal agencies designate critical habitat when the species is listed. ESA critics claim that designation at the time of listing does not work because agencies do not always know what must be done to recover the species in question. Designation of critical habitat would be shifted to the recovery planning process and recovery plans would have to be completed within three years after a species was listed. In addition, any lawsuit challenging the designation of critical habitat would have to challenge the recovery plan upon which the designation was based.
A number of environmental groups contend that S. 1100 could do more harm than good by causing further delay and adding to the costs of critical habitat designation. Among the criticisms are that S. 1100 would not close the loopholes that have contributed to the backlog of more than 1,000 species without designated habitats because, would not require recovery goals or improve implementation, and would not require the Secretary of the Interior to protect survival habitat during the 3-year recovery planning process.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
House Resources Subcommittees Put Spotlight on Snake River Dam Issue:
Last Thursday, the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans and Subcommittee on Water and Power held a joint hearing on a resolution introduced by Representative Doc Hastings (R-WA).
The non-binding resolution, H. Con. Res. 63, argues against dam removal in federal efforts to restore threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead runs on the Columbia and Snake Rivers.
A number of members, including Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and former Resources Chair George Miller (D-CA), urged other members not to push the measure, arguing that it would bias future discussion against dam removal before current studies have been completed. They also stated that the resolution was misleading because it documents the benefits of all of the dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers, while the benefits provided by the four lower Snake River dams - the dams being considered for breaching to restore endangered salmon runs - are relatively small.
Largely because of four federal dams on the Lower Snake River, every single species of Snake River salmon is now listed under the Endangered Species Act. This December, the National Marine Fisheries Service will release its long-term recovery plan for Snake River salmon, and partial removal of these four dams is one of the options being studied. Science has shown that removing the four dams is the only option under consideration by the Clinton Administration that can save these legendary fish from extinction.
Further strengthening the case for dam removal, a recent report prepared by economist Phil Meyer, who is serving as a consultant to the Army Corps of Engineers, stated that breaching the four lower Snake River dams is the only way the federal government can honor treaty obligations to Northwest tribes.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
For more information or to see the text of any of the bills listed below, go to the Thomas website at http://thomas.loc.gov/ and enter the bill number.
H.R. 728: Introduced by Representative Frank Lucas (R-OK), the Small Watersheds Rehabilitation Amendments of 1999 would amend the Watershed Prote ction and Flood Prevention Act to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide cost share assistance for the rehabilitation of structural measures constructed as part of water resource projects previously funded by the Secretary under such Act or related laws. The bill was referred to the House Agriculture Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities, Resource Conservation, and Credit; the House Resources Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water and Power.
H.R. 934: Introduced by Representative Frank Pallone (D-NJ), H.R. 934 would prohibit the commercial harvesting of Atlantic striped bass in the coastal waters and the exclusive economic zone. The bill would direct the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission to take prompt action to amend the Interstate Fisheries Management Plan for Striped Bass, dated October 1, 1981, to take into account the new prohibition. The bill was referred to the House Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
H.R. 1396: Introduced by Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), the National Forest Protection and Restoration Act of 1999 states as its purpose 1) saving taxpayers money, reducing the deficit, cutting corporate welfare, and protecting and restoring America's natural heritage by eliminating the fiscally wasteful and ecologically destructive commercial logging program on Federal public lands and 2) facilitating the economic recovery and diversification of communities dependent on the Federal logging program.
H.R. 1396 would prohibit new timber sales on Federal public lands, including commercial logging. Exceptions would be made for the gathering of firewood or other wood by individuals for personal, noncommercial use through free-use permits and provisions included in any treaty with Native American tribes.
H.R. 1674: Introduced by Representative Gary Miller (R-CA), H.R. 1674 would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act with respect to civil actions against public waters systems that are in compliance with national drinking water regulations promulgated by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. The bill was referred to the House Commerce Committee.
H.R. 1909: Introduced by Representative Robert Andrews (D-NJ), H.R. 1909 would make supplemental appropriations of $85 million for fiscal year 1999 to ensure the inclusion of commonly used pesticides in state source water assessment programs. Source water assessment programs under the Safe Drinking Water Act would be required to include (1) the assessment of the pesticides chlorothalonil, pendimethalin, paraquat, cyanazine, bensulide, chlorpyrifos, diazinon, metalaxyl, and mecoprop; (2) the assessment of surface water sources; (3) the assessment of residential drinking wells; and (4) the assessment of contaminated soil. The bill was referred to the House Appropriations Committee.
H.R. 1944: Introduced by Representative John Shadegg (R-AZ), the Gila River Indian Community--Phelps Dodge Corporation Water Rights Settlement Act of 1999 would ratify, approve, and confirm the water rights Settlement Agreement among the Gila River Indian Community, Phelps Dodge Corporation, and the United States. The Secretary of the Interior would be charged with overseeing the resolution of the settlement, which deals with the water rights claims of certain Indian tribes in the Little Colorado River Basin in Arizona. H.R. 1944 was referred to the House Resources Committee.
S. 685: Introduced by Senator Michael Crapo (R-ID), the State Water Sovereignty Act would preserve the authority of States over water within their boundaries and delegate to States the authority of Congress to regulate water. The bill was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Back to top or back to home page or back to Whats New
There are no hearings this week - Congress is in recess.
CHECK OUT OUR HOMEPAGE!! http://www.amrivers.org
QUESTIONS? Contact Suzy McDowell, Conservation Outreach Coordinator, at smcdowell@amrivers.org or 202-347-7550x3040.
Legislative information taken from many sources including Thomas, Congressional Greensheets, Greenwire, and Roll Call.
Outreach Coordinator
American Rivers
1025 Vermont Ave, NW, #720
Washington, DC 20005
202-347-7550 x3040
smcdowell@amrivers.org
Back to top
Back to Whats New Index Page
Back to CRC Index Page
Back to Watershed Index Page
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council
