Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012

Floor Speech

Mr. LUCAS. I move to strike the last word.

The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this amendment, and I think it might be worthwhile to explain for just a moment what the small watershed program is and what the small watershed rehabilitation program is all about.

These were efforts begun in the 1940s and 1950s by this body in an effort to address flooding conditions. Under this program, 10,000 small earthen dams were built across the country, working in interlocking series to prevent downstream flooding by capturing flood waters at the source.

Now, like anything after 50 years, its life expectancy can be expected to come to a conclusion. In 2000, we created the rehabilitation program to extend the life of these structures by additional time, and it now appears, based on the modern techniques being used, engineering technologies, that these 50-year structures will wind up with a 150-year total life expectancy in many instances.

This is a program where the rehabilitation resources are allocated based on need as scored by USDA. It's not an earmark program. It's not a targeted program. The money is made available, and as the structures need work, they are prioritized. It's a wonderful way to address this issue.

Now, if you look at the amount of property and life and infrastructure that have been protected in the life of these programs, it's almost incalculable. In Oklahoma, in the range of $81 million a year worth of property has been saved.

My colleague alluded to programs that only affect limited numbers of areas. I would note even in the great State of Georgia, there are 357 of these watershed structures. There are 69 that within the next 10 years will need the rehabilitation program. There are benefits in every State.

I would just simply say, if you care and you believe that infrastructure is a part of our responsibility, if you believe that protecting every life below that dam all the way to the ocean is important, and the property, then this is a wise, small use of resources. What my friend attempts to do here is to zero out the whole program. No money for rehab this year. No money for rehab this year. That would be a travesty. That would be a tragic use of resources in the past. It's important, I think, that we continue this program.

Mr. KINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LUCAS. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. KINGSTON. As the chairman of Agriculture knows and is fully aware, I wanted to underscore the point that you just made that the ordinary mandatory authorization for this program is $165 million. That has been zeroed out, and the only thing we're doing this year is this $15 million. And so even at the current $15 million level, it's still 150 less than it ordinarily has been.

Mr. LUCAS. I would say, reclaiming my time, that the gentleman is right. This is a dramatic reduction over what had been expected during the farm bill. Yet this $15 million will do tremendous work, and it is allocated on a 65-35 cost basis. Local and State government have to come up with more than a third of the money to be able to implement these rehabilitation programs.

For a few pennies, we do a great deal across the country based on need, not anyone's political priorities but based on need. This is an exceptional program. I would ask my colleagues to turn back this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Source