Thursday, November 8, 2007

U.S. Senator Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
Floor Statement on the Water Resources Development Act
Remarks as Delivered on the Senate Floor

Mr. President, I wish to rise and speak on the Water Resources Development Act, and I wish to, first of all, thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe of the EPW Committee for all the work they have done on the WRDA--Water Resources Development Act--and I wish to particularly thank my colleague, Max Baucus, as he is chairman, and I am the ranking member of the subcommittee overseeing the Corps of Engineers and the Water Resources Development Act. I voted for it on the floor, and today, when the vote comes to override the veto of the President, I am going to vote to override the veto. I wish to enter into the record today, specifically and candidly and briefly, exactly the reasons why.

No. 1, the Water Resources Development Act is an authorization, not appropriations. To characterize it as overspending is not correct because it is the appropriations bill where we do that.

No. 2, authorizations set priorities, priorities upon which the Appropriations Committee makes decisions based on the money it has and on where best to spend the resources we have.

No. 3, as for the size of the authorization, everyone should know that up until the year 2000, this Senate, and the House on the other end of this building, biannually passed Water Resources Development Act reauthorizations. We have gone 7 years without prioritizing the Corps of Engineers and the water resources of this country.

Think about what has happened in those 7 years--Rita and Katrina in particular; from my standpoint, in my State of Georgia, a category 4, 100-year drought threatening the drinking water of millions and millions of Georgians, North Carolinians, Tennesseans, and Alabamans. In this bill is money for the North Metro Planning District of Georgia, a consolidation of all the governments in the region, to coordinate water resource development so we can better deal with retention, saving water as it flows downstream so we can have drinking water assurances and we can have backup that allows us to assure our citizens when another 100-year drought, category 4 drought comes, that we will have done the planning necessary to deal with it, which right now has not been done. For this bill to be vetoed is to say no to an imminent priority in my State and for tens of millions of people in the Southeast.

So while I have complete respect for the President of the United States, and I commend him on so many things and don't like to vote against him, he is wrong to veto this bill. I will be proud to vote to override that veto because I wish to prioritize infrastructure for our country on a timely basis; I wish to give the appropriators the indications of what we, as a Congress, think are the most needed programs to be appropriated; I wish to deal with the ramifications and the disaster of Katrina and Rita, to see that it doesn't happen again; I want the Everglades project to go forward; and I want my State and my people to have the drinking water and the water resources necessary.

For us to delay or for us to deny would be wrong. We will have fights on the appropriations bills over how much money to spend. We should never have a fight on our responsibility to prioritize the needs of our States or the needs of our citizens. I commend Chairman Boxer, I commend Senator Inhofe and Senator Baucus for their hard work, and I will join with them in voting to override the veto and set the priorities for the citizens of my State and for the United States in the years to come on their water resources.