Free Flow of Information Act of 2007 - Motion to Proceed - Resumed
Floor Speech
FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION ACT OF 2007--MOTION TO PROCEED--Resumed -- (Senate - July 29, 2008)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise to speak on an important issue related to my responsibilities as chair of the Coast Guard and Fisheries Subcommittee in the Commerce Committee. I see some of my colleagues on the floor. I ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, Senator Dorgan be recognized for 10 minutes, Senator Murray for 10 minutes, and Senator Salazar for 10 minutes. Knowing that my colleague, Senator Specter, is expected to show, when he shows up we will fit him in the sequence back and forth, depending on when he shows up.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
NEW ORLEANS OIL SPILL
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, last week over 400,000 gallons of fuel spilled into the Mississippi River near New Orleans after a chemical tanker collided with a fuel barge and literally split the barge in half.
This is a picture depicting the Coast Guard looking at the two halves of this barge that was split in half right in the heart of New Orleans, causing serious damage in the area from diesel and diesel fumes, even impacting the French Quarter.
Now, the second chart shows the impact of that spill on downtown and the seriousness of that spill in the region. This major spill has closed the Mississippi River from New Orleans to the river's mouth, choking off one of the Nation's most important major commercial arteries. Even now, a week later, only a few ships can get through on this 100-mile stretch of the lower Mississippi.
As the picture shows from the night of the accident, the mighty Mississippi was covered with this eerie sheen right in the downtown area of New Orleans. Now, a week later, some of the heavy fuel oil has turned into tar balls, bouncing and sticking and contaminating this waterway. The spill has slowed down New Orleans' normally thriving waterfront, and the economic impact is already being felt. To put this tragedy into perspective, the economic loss from a total shutdown of the port would cost our Nation's economy around $270 million a day.
While the Coast Guard has begun to allow limited essential vessel traffic back into this area, at one time point over 800 tugs and barges were impacted by the spill, and many ships are still waiting to return to this vital transportation corridor that needs to be reopened. We are only now beginning to understand fully the economic and environmental impacts this spill has caused.
Unfortunately, as many of my colleagues know, these sorts of spills are becoming all too frequent. Last November, the Cosco Busan cargo ship spilled 54,000 gallons of highly toxic bunker fuel into San Francisco Bay, costing well over $50 million in cleanup costs.
Hurricane Katrina and Rita caused spills totaling nearly 8 million gallons, released throughout the Gulf of Mexico region.
In December of 2004, the Selendang Ayu broke apart, pouring 350,000 gallons of oil into the waters off the Aleutian Islands, killing countless sea birds and marine mammals and sea otters.
In 2004, in my home State, the oil tanker, Polar Texas, spilled 1,000 gallons of crude oil into the Puget Sound. This spill in the Dalco Passage cost millions of dollars to clean up and was a real wake-up call to many of my Washington constituents.
As I know the Presiding Officer, Senator Lautenberg, is aware, because he has been a great champion over strengthening the oil spill prevention safety net, the oil tanker, Athos, spilled over a quarter-million gallons of crude oil into the Delaware River and its tributaries in November of 2004.
As chair of the Commerce Subcommittee with jurisdiction over oil spill issues and the Coast Guard, I want my colleagues to know the Commerce Committee has been working hard to try to give the Coast Guard the tools it needs to prevent these spills and to respond quickly and effectively when a spill happens. Over the last few years, the committee has held several hearings and has asked for and received information from the Coast Guard and Government Accountability Office, and worked to help understand and update the Nation's oil spill prevention safety net.
We worked hard to develop a thoughtful and balanced piece of legislation that would help prevent more of these tragic spills from happening again. Almost exactly 1 year ago, after months of bipartisan negotiations, the Commerce Committee unanimously reported the 2007 Coast Guard authorization bill, which contains many of these oil prevention provisions. I would like to thank Ranking Member Stevens for his thoughtful improvements and his strong support of these vital provisions, which would update the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
Even though we have this bipartisan bill before us that has come out of the Commerce Committee, and even though it is critical to our national security and emergency preparedness, it is still being subjected to the same kind of obstructionism from a handful of Senators who don't want to move forward on the legislation, a situation we are becoming all too familiar with on the Senate floor. In this case, the bill is being held hostage by one or two Senators who seem interested in stopping its progress. They do not seem to care that it has the support of the Bush administration's Department of Homeland Security, which stated it ``strongly supports'' this legislation.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the Department of Homeland Security letter to the chairman, DANIEL INOUYE, and the vice chair, TED STEVENS, from Donald Kent, Assistant Secretary, Office of Legislative Affairs.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,
Washington, DC, May 19, 2008.
Hon. Daniel Inouye,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. TED STEVENS,
Vice Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
DEAR CHAIRMAN INOUYE AND VICE CHAIRMAN STEVENS: This letter sets forth the Department of Homeland Security's views on S. 1892, the ``Coast Guard Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.''
As noted in the Department's September 20, 2007, views letter, the Department strongly supports S. 1892, as reported by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. As the Senate prepares to take up the measure, the Department urges the Committee to review anew the Department's objections that are set forth in that views letter and prepare amendments that would address the concerns of the Department and the Coast Guard.
The Department urges the Committee to seek amendments that would further perfect two of the three key Administration initiatives (i.e., sec. 201 (Vice commandant; vice admirals) and sec. 916 (Protection and fair treatment of seafarers)). Specifically, the Department would strongly support amendments that, with regard to sec. 201, would provide for the treatment of incumbents during the period of transition and, with regard to sec. 916, would allow the use of community service moneys to provide necessary support for other seafarers who have been abandoned in the United States.
The Department also urges the Committee to reject any future amendment to the Coast Guard Authorization Act that would prescribe the manner in which the Coast Guard executes missions, affects or divests the Service of its adjudicatory functions, prescribes the qualifications of Coast Guard officers, imposes reporting requirements that attribute expenditures to a single mission area, or prescribes acquisition practices harmful to the interests of the Government that would otherwise cause the Administration, the Department, or the Coast Guard to object strongly to the bill. From the viewpoint of the Department and the Coast Guard, the absence of such language reflects positively on the Committee and the institutional role of the Senate. The Department applauds the Committee's past and future efforts to ensure that S. 1892 remains free of such and like language.
Both the Department and the Coast Guard appreciate the Committee's willingness to work amicably with all parties to pass a bill that would enhance the organizational efficiency and operational effectiveness of the Coast Guard, yet preserve the Commandant's authorities as Service Chief. The Department is confident that, during further congressional consideration, the Committee, the Department, and the Coast Guard can agree on language to address the Senate's objectives, as well as the Department's and the Coast Guard's concerns.
The Department and the Coast Guard deeply appreciate your efforts to resolve those issues that preclude the Senate from taking up and passing the measure. The Department stands ready to assist you in this endeavor.
The Office of Management and Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the Administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of this report to Congress.
I appreciate your interest in the Coast Guard and the Department of Homeland Security, and I look forward to working with you on future homeland security issues. If I may be of further assistance, please contact the Office of Legislative Affairs.
Sincerely,
DONALD H. KENT, Jr.
Assistant Secretary,
Office of Legislative Affairs.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I also want to make sure people understand the Coast Guard and its commandant, Admiral Thad Allen, have been working hard to see this legislation passed. In fact, Admiral Allen has made the statement: ``The swift enactment of these provisions would significantly improve safety, security, and stewardship in the maritime domain.''
But these Senators refuse to meet with the Coast Guard Commandant who wants to at least have a chance to explain why he needs this legislation to pass so the Coast Guard can do the critical job of securing our Nation's waterways.
Let me take a moment to describe why this bipartisan legislation is so important. First, it would require the Coast Guard to have rules in place for how it needs to respond to any kind of wreckage or salvage operation, such as the wreckage in the Mississippi River from the incident last week. Because no strict guidelines are in place as to the amount of time it takes to respond to oil spill wreckage, a barge, such as the one in the Mississippi, could be left for many days in the middle of the river.
Another section of the legislation addresses human error. We don't know what caused this spill yet, although we know there was not a properly licensed pilot in the tug pulling the barge, and we do know human error is the cause of many spills. In fact, the bill requires the Coast Guard to take into consideration human error causes of spills and how best to address them.
The Coast Guard would also benefit from the fact that NOAA's oil spill response program would get up to an additional $15 million per year from the oil spill liability trust fund. This program is currently on the ground helping with the oil spill in Louisiana, but they are limited in their ability because of severe budget constraints. So certainly having this bill passed would have helped in the response in New Orleans.
There are other significant measures that will help in improving our Nation's oil spill prevention safety net. So I hope my colleagues can help us get this legislation over the goal line because it is critically important we do so before we leave for the August recess.
It provides the Coast Guard with the critical resources and authority it needs in other areas as well--to fight terrorists, to capture drug runners, and to defend our homeland security. So isn't it time to help push the Coast Guard into the 21st century and begin planning for the challenges of tomorrow, rather than continuing to struggle with the challenges of today? And isn't it time we pass this legislation that might actually help prevent another oil spill from happening again, such as the one in Louisiana, and to give the Coast Guard the tools it needs?
Tomorrow, I will be asking my colleagues for unanimous consent to pass this legislation. I hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who believe in strong tools for the Coast Guard will talk to their colleagues and ask them to stop blocking this legislation so we can get on with preventing another incident such as this one from happening again.
I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source