NEW BOARD LINK, GO TO THIS LINK FOR THE CURRENT GAME: http://virtualamerica.ipbhost.com
Welcome to Virtual America. We hope you enjoy your visit.

If you're looking to join and sign up for the first time, register here! You'll want to familiarize yourself with the rules of Virtual America which you can find here. And you'll want to read up on how to sign in and create your character here. After all than you can sign in and get to playing! We're all friends here and we're certain you'll enjoy it here at Virtual America!

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
HR 64 Flood Prevention and Beach Management Act
Topic Started: 13 Jun 2013, 06:46 PM (89 Views)
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

48 hours for debate

Quote:
 
Congressman Peter J. Lucas, for himself and Congresswoman Andrea Martinez proposes

A BILL TO provide a one billion dollar non recurring appropriation to the Corps of Engineers to clear their backlog in levee repairs and to reallocate funds spent on beach nourishment projects to pay for levee repair needs arising in the future.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress Assembled as Follows

Section 1 Short Title

This Act may be cited as the “Flood Protection and Beach Management Act”.

Section 2 Findings

(1) Since 1990, as much as $3 billion million of federal money has been spent on beach nourishment programs.

(2) Congress has spent average of $100 million per year on beach nourishment programs since 1997.

(3) At the same time as this much money is being spent on beach nourishment, The US Corps of Engineers estimate that at least 985 levees that come under their Levee Safety Program are at significant risk of flooding within 100 years, including 177 that can not be reasonably foreseen to perform properly in a major flood.

(4) The estimated cost to repair and update these levees is $2.5 billion, while repair alone would cost $1 billion. The repair backlog grows by around $100 million per year.

(5) The U.S. Corps of Engineers has also accumulated $1 billion in unobligated balances, money that could now be put to good use.

Section 3 Provisions

(1) Federal monies shall not be used for any beach nourishment program.

(2) Annual funding for the Corps of Engineers Levee Safety Program is increased by $100 million.

(3) All unobligated balances from previous fiscal years to The US Corps of Engineers shall be diverted to the Levee Safety Program to clear the repair backlog. These repairs shall be completed within 5 years, after which any remaining monies shall revert to the Treasury.

Section 4 Enactment

This Act shall have effect upon being signed into law.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
peter
Member Avatar
Lucas for President: Take Back America!
Madam Speaker

This Bill represents a sensible solution to a critical problem we have. Our flood defenses are in a sorry state and need some serious money spending on them to bring them up to standard. But using unobligated balances to the US Corps of Engineers we can clear the backlog, and by eliminating federal funding for beach nourishment we can keep on top of future maintenance needs. I hope everyone will join me in passing this common sense legislation. I ask that the House pass this Bill by unanimous consent.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Motion recognized 24 hours for objections.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Jack Bentley
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

I object and offer the following amendment:

Quote:
 
Section 3 Provisions

(1) Federal monies shall not be used for any beach nourishment program.

(1) Annual funding for the Corps of Engineers Levee Safety Program is increased by $100 million.

(2) All unobligated balances from previous fiscal years to The US Corps of Engineers shall be diverted to the Levee Safety Program to clear the repair backlog. These repairs shall be completed within 5 years, after which any remaining monies shall revert to the Treasury.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Objection noted. Debate continues.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
peter
Member Avatar
Lucas for President: Take Back America!
Madam Speaker

This Bill adopts a responsible approach to public spending: what it spends, it saves elsewhere. But if the gentleman from Pennsylvania does not like my proposal for a cost offset, I would encourage him to propose an alternative, as opposed to just unnecessarily growing the deficit.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Jack Bentley
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

The Gentleman from Texas should understand better than most the devastation that natural disasters can have on our nation's coasts. Does he really expect the individual states to be held fully responsible for the complete restoration of our coastlines after super storms like Hurricane Katrina or Hurricane Sandy?

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
peter
Member Avatar
Lucas for President: Take Back America!
Madam Speaker

Federal beach nourishment funding is not for rebuilding beaches devastated by disasters. It is rather for making beaches look nicer to attract tourists.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Edward Kensington
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

The Congressman from Texas is correct that federal monies are used for tourism.

Panama City Beach, Florida offers to us an example of federal monies being used for tourism.

We need to be using our financial resources here to repair and strengthen our levees.
Edited by Edward Kensington, 14 Jun 2013, 02:06 PM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Jack Bentley
Member Avatar

Madame Speaker,

I just want to point out that beach nourishment was used along the New Jersey coast after Hurricane Sandy in 2012 and is often used to expand the beach in an effort to absorb the extreme energy from super storms like Sandy. However, I will concede that beach nourishment is also used to improve the beaches for tourists and summer residents, but these tourists supply huge economic benefits that more than outweigh the costs of the projects.

I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Landry
Member Avatar
Winter is Coming to the Red States
Madam Speaker,

I second the Bentley Amendment and I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Melissa Sanchez
Member Avatar

Madam Speaker,

I move to extend debate for 48 hours, for the purpose of making an amendment to the same provision in the event the Bentley Amendment fails.


I yield, but reserve the balance of my time.
Edited by Melissa Sanchez, 15 Jun 2013, 08:11 AM.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Matt Urbana
Member Avatar

Madam Speaker,

I second the motion to extend and I yield.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

With less than 24 hours left in debate the motions are ruled dilatory.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Heather Holson
Member Avatar

Debate is now closed. Bill shall be moved for a vote.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · House Debate Archives · Next Topic »
Locked Topic


Theme by Sith of the ZBTZ