congressional_record: CREC-1996-10-21-pt1-PgE1933-2
Data license: Public Domain (U.S. Government data) · Data source: Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API
This data as json
| granule_id | date | congress | session | volume | issue | title | chamber | granule_class | sub_granule_class | page_start | page_end | speakers | bills | citation | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CREC-1996-10-21-pt1-PgE1933-2 | 1996-10-21 | 104 | 2 | UMATILLA BASIN PROJECT COMPLETION ACT | HOUSE | EXTENSIONS | ALLOTHER | E1933 | E1933 | [{"name": "Wes Cooley", "role": "speaking"}] | [{"congress": "104", "type": "HR", "number": "2392"}] | 142 Cong. Rec. E1933 | Congressional Record, Volume 142 Issue 143 (Monday, October 21, 1996) [Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 143 (Monday, October 21, 1996)] [Extensions of Remarks] [Page E1933] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] UMATILLA BASIN PROJECT COMPLETION ACT ______ HON. WES COOLEY of oregon in the house of representatives Monday, October 21, 1996 Mr. COOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, over the course of the last year, I have worked diligently to resolve long-standing water disputes in the Umatilla Basin of northeast Oregon. With the help of Senator Hatfield, affected irrigation districts in the Basin (the districts, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (the Tribes), and the State of Oregon (the State), we were able to fashion a compromise which struck the delicate balance between environmental enhancement and the needs of the local economy. However, this consensus could not have been reached if all sides were not willing to compromise. Because of this, I am somewhat puzzled by recent statements that place the blame for the bill's failure on the irrigation districts. H.R. 2392, my bill to adjust the boundaries for the four irrigation districts in the Umatilla Basin, has undergone many changes in the past year. The original draft of the bill would have simply adjusted these boundaries upon enactment. However, it has always been my intention to listen carefully to all members of the community in the hopes of ultimately crafting a proposal which has unanimous support. So, when the Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation (the Tribes) raised concerns about the need for a continued commitment to environmental enhancement, and a new NEPA study prior to boundary adjustment, I added those provisions to the bill. The compromise agreed to by the Tribes, the districts, and the State of Oregon would make the boundary adjustments contingent upon completion of a NEPA study and approval of the Secretary of the Interior--a major concession on the part of the districts who were seeking long-term stability. In addition, I added language that requires the districts to donate 6,500 acre feet of water per year for environmental enhancement--as their interim contract requires--until a portion of Phase III of the Umatilla Basin Project large enough to exchange 90 cubic feet per second is completed and operational. These provisions were added in a good faith attempt to address the concerns of the Tribes. Unfortunately, despite the agreement of all affected interests in the Basin, the Clinton Administration threatened to veto the bill. They wanted to alter the bill so that the Secretary of the Interior had full discretion to not only adjust the boundaries, but to alter the size of the new boundaries. In short, they wanted the authorization to do something for which they are already authorized, but have failed to accomplish. The Administration wanted more spending authority without addressing the basic issue of boundary adjustments. In short, they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. I could not support a change that would render the status quo. The compromise reached by all of the interests in the Umatilla Basin would have succeeded because each of the parties had an economic stake in seeing that the other parties' objectives were attained. The districts' opposition to the Administration's request to negate the one section of the bill in which they have an interest should not be viewed as uncooperative. By removing sections from the bill that pertain to the districts, we would be left with an unbalanced, unworkable solution that would not solve the complex problems in the Basin, or provide long-term stability for all who live there. Even more troubling than the Clinton Administration's threatened veto over a procedural technicality, are some of the statements that have been made since the bill failed to pass. These statements argue that the districts' failure to compromise was responsible for the bill's inability to win Administration support. Nothing could be further from the truth. Once again, I would point out the progress we have made in the last year. What once was a bill that only contained boundary adjustments upon enactment for the four districts, eventually contained provisions that first, authorized $64 million for construction of Phase III of the Umatilla Basin Project; second, authorized $6.5 million for the Tribes' share of a joint City of Pendleton/Tribes' water storage facility; third, authorized $500,000 for development of a water management plan, and a ground water/surface water model of the Umatilla Basin; fourth, authorized $400,000 annually for the operation of Phases I, II, and III; fifth, required that the Secretary of the Interior enter into negotiations with the State of Oregon to determine the Tribes' water right claim; sixth, required the districts to donate 6,500 acre feet of water for environmental enhancement until a portion of Phase III is built large enough to exchange 90 cubic feet per second; and seventh, required a NEPA study to be conducted prior to the adjustment of the districts' boundaries. Many of these provisions, particularly numbers 6 and 7, constitute substantial movement on the part of the districts, and should not be discounted in the rush to lay blame on any one party. I still maintain that the only way to address the Umatilla Basin's long-standing water issues is to work together in a cooperative effort--something I felt was accomplished this year. Although I will not be returning for the 105th Congress, I hope that my successor-- whoever it may be--builds upon the agreements reached in the last year, and helps to foster long-term stability for the environment and the local economy in the Umatilla Basin. ____________________ |