Bill Shuster

Mr. SHUSTER

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, we are here today on the floor with the WRDA bill. We are back in regular order. This bill reasserts congressional authority, making sure that Congress has its say on these matters. This bill addresses specific Federal responsibilities that strengthen our infrastructure and it is fiscally responsible. If we pass the manager's amendment, there are 31 Chief's Reports and 29 feasibility studies which touch all corners of the United States. I know Members on both sides of the aisle have projects in there that are extremely important to their district, to their State, and, of course, to the Nation. It certainly was my goal for this to come to the floor in a bipartisan manner just the way it came out of committee. Unfortunately, it did violate a House rule, and we had to strip a part of that bill out. But I just want to say again, as I opened, I agree with Mr. DeFazio-- and you heard, as he just pointed out, there are many Members on our side of the aisle that agree--we have got to figure out a way to move this forward so that Congress continues to have a say, and that those dollars that people pay to use the ports, they pay that fee, and when it goes into that trust fund, it is spent on its intended purpose. It is just wrong--it is absolutely wrong--that we don't do that. We are going to pass this bill on the floor here tomorrow. I will continue to work with the ranking member to find a solution, because it is my goal to be here next Congress and to have another WRDA bill on the floor and address this problem and continue to pass good legislation that strengthens our infrastructure and strengthens America's competitiveness in the world. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHUSTER. I will answer that. We believe the projects are already authorized. Back in 2007, in 33 United States Code section 2332(i)(2), it states there that ``all studies and projects carried out under this section from Army Civil Works appropriations shall be fully funded within the program funding levels provided in this subsection.'' We believe that these are one of the projects cited in that. We believe these have been authorized.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, yes, we believe it is. Prior to 2007, these projects were authorized. So, under that law, these things are authorized. They are not earmarked.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Olson).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), the former chairman of the full committee. (Mr. YOUNG of Alaska asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the vice chairman of the full committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Rothfus).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Rodney Davis), a member of the committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of H.R. 5303, the Water Resources Development Act of 2016. Subcommittee Chairman Gibbs and I worked closely with Ranking Members DeFazio and Napolitano on this vital water infrastructure bill. Thanks to their hard work, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure unanimously approved H.R. 5303 in May. We tailored WRDA 2016 to address specific Federal responsibilities, strengthening our infrastructure through the activities of the Army Corps of Engineers to maintain competitiveness, create jobs, and grow the economy. This legislation follows important reforms Congress put in place in 2014 with the Water Resources Reform and Development Act. Without those reforms, we wouldn't be here today to consider another WRDA bill. The 2014 bill and today's legislation restore regular order and the 2-year cycle of Congress considering these essential bills. This has been one of my highest priorities as chairman, and I am pleased today that in this Congress, as in last Congress, we have a WRDA bill on the floor. WRDA 2016 maintains Congress' constitutional authority and oversight in ensuring that we have a safe, effective infrastructure system. Following our authorization process reforms, every Corps activity in this bill is locally driven; reviewed by the Corps according to strict, congressionally established criteria; and presented to Congress for consideration in the form of chief's reports and the Corps' new annual report. Only proposals that followed this process were eligible for inclusion in this bill. If the manager's amendment is adopted, WRDA will authorize 31 chief's reports and 29 feasibility studies. Each chief's report was reviewed by the committee in a public hearing. These are critical regional priorities that provide significant national economic and environmental benefits. For example, WRDA authorizes the long-delayed upgrades to the Upper Ohio River's Emsworth, Dashields, and Montgomery, the EDM, locks and dams. The EDM facilities provide critical access to the Port of Pittsburgh, one of the Nation's busiest inland ports. This will provide enormous benefits to the region and make our entire Nation more competitive. The same can be said for authorizations for the Port of Charleston, Port Everglades, which has been under review by the Corps for 18 years--and it is finally going to be approved--and the Everglades ecosystem, flood control along the Missouri River and around Sacramento, and more. The bill also increases flexibility and removes barriers for State, local, and non-Federal interests to invest in their infrastructure. Factoring in the manager's amendment, WRDA will authorize over $9 billion to cover the Federal share of these improvements to our ports, channels, locks, dams, and other infrastructure. These investments are fully offset--I repeat they are fully offset--with deauthorizations, and the bill sunsets new authorizations to help prevent future project backlogs. WRDA has no earmarks and abides by all House rules. However, in order to comply with House rules and call up this bill today, one section of the bill, as reported by the committee, was removed. I want to say that I agree with Ranking Member DeFazio that the user fees paid into the harbor maintenance trust fund should be used to improve our transportation system. It should be fundamental: When you pay a user fee into a system, it should go to its intended purposes. However, we found ourselves in a position where section 108 conflicted with House rules. We worked to find another resolution to this one issue but were unable to do so within the rules of the House. I appreciate the ranking member's passion for this provision and thank him for his tireless efforts in support of infrastructure investment. I want to continue working with him and others to find a solution as we work with the Senate. However, we cannot lose sight of the larger, more important issue. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. This bill is not perfect, but it is a good bill. Only three WRDA bills were enacted between 2000 and 2014, and that record is really unacceptable. Each delay placed America another step behind our competitors. We simply cannot afford more delays. We must pass this jobs and infrastructure bill and return to the regular 2-year WRDA cycle to keep the Army Corps focused on these much-needed investments. We cannot sacrifice these critical infrastructure improvements because of one issue. We have a wide range of stakeholder interests in this bill, and 75 letters of support for WRDA 2016, including: National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Retail Federation, National Conference of State Legislatures, and many other local and regional groups. WRDA 2016 is good public policy. This bill advances critical water resources infrastructure improvements, restores regular order, and gets Congress back on that 2-year WRDA cycle. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, DC, September 22, 2016. Hon. Bill Shuster, Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: I write regarding H.R. 5303, the Water Resources Development Act of 2016. This bill contains provisions under the jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring this bill before the House of Representatives in an expeditious manner, and accordingly, I will agree that the Committee on Natural Resources be discharged from further consideration of the bill. I do so with the understanding that this action does not affect the jurisdiction of the Committee on Natural Resources, and that the Committee expressly reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provision within its jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this, or any similar legislation. I ask that you support any such request. I also ask that a copy of this letter and your response be included in the Congressional Record during consideration of H.R. 5303 bill on the House floor. Thank you for your work on this Important issue, and I look forward to its enactment soon. Sincerely, Rob Bishop, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 5303.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 10 seconds to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Gibbs).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), one of the hardest working members on the committee.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time both sides have left in debate.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for bringing this important amendment to the floor. It does several things. The first thing it does is it directs the Corps of Engineers, as the gentlewoman pointed out, to just communicate, to give direction to the folks that are involved in these projects. We keep spinning our wheels in these projects. We are spending more money than we have to, and this highlights a problem that we face with the Corps. Again, this amendment establishes and implements cost-sharing agreements during the dam safety repair projects. Of course, it makes all parties involved communicate so we can get these projects moving forward, so I think it is a good governance amendment. I urge all Members to support this amendment.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Iowa for bringing this good, bipartisan amendment to the floor. I have seen the pictures on TV of what is happening out there in Cedar Rapids, and our thoughts and prayers are with that community out there tonight as they fight that challenge. Again, this amendment, as the gentleman explained, expedites the Cedar River project. I think this infrastructure project getting done quicker is important. I have always supported getting these things done faster because I believe time is money. The longer these things go, the more expensive they get. This amendment goes a long way into making sure that this project is pushed out there faster and it gets done. So I appreciate my colleague from Iowa for bringing this. I urge a ``yes'' vote. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment that allows channels assumed for maintenance to be considered equally as authorized projects. Of course, we are dealing specifically with the Port of Houston on this; so I would encourage all Members from the Houston area on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment, which will improve the bill. Supporting this amendment is important. Also, to those Members from the Houston area on both sides of the aisle, this is something that is going to be good for their port, and the underlying bill is going to be good for their port in the long run. I think it is a fairness amendment, and I thank the gentleman for offering it. I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The manager's amendment that I am offering makes technical and conforming changes to the Rules Committee print. Specifically, this amendment includes a provision to ensure homeowners can assess their property on TVA lakes. This amendment includes a provision that ensures the appropriate cost share is carried out for the Los Angeles River chief's report we are authorizing in this bill specifically at the request of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. It also has a provision to have the Government Accountability Office carry out a study to determine what Federal obligations are required for tribal property affected by the construction of several dams on the Columbia River in Washington and Oregon. It requires and expedites revisions to water control manuals in States in which drought has occurred in the last year. Lastly, this amendment contains three chief's reports and two post- authorization change reports that have been delivered to Congress since the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure marked up the bill in May 2016. I urge all Members to support my amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SHUSTER. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a good amendment. I support it. This amendment sets guidelines for the scope of work under the section 408 process, which has been misinterpreted by the Corps of Engineers. It takes years for this to be approved. Mr. DeFazio just stood up and said he hopes the Corps is listening. I hope it is listening, too, but too many times they just don't listen to us. They don't take the direction that the Congress puts in front of them. They stonewall and drag their feet. Mr. Babin's amendment clarifies this, and I believe it is a good government reform amendment. I thank the gentleman for offering it, and I urge all Members to support it.