Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I understand that some are arguing that maintaining the ``status quo'' in states can set disparate ballast standards is better than moving any legislation establishing a stronger national ballast water standard, which is widely agreed upon as a necessary tool in our fight against waterborne invasive species.

While I share their concerns about the need to address this issue, I cannot support that stance. We need a national ballast water standard and if the House does not take a position in this bill, I am afraid that this issue will once again fall off the Congressional agenda. I feared a yes vote on the Slaughter-Dingell amendment--which would strip out the ballast water section altogether--would take away the last realistic chance for the House to consider this issue. This concern is relevant given that the ``Super Committee'' is set to dominate the legislative agenda in both Chambers, and after that, the upcoming elections.

The House last passed legislation setting a national ballast water standard in 2007. We can't wait another four years to even begin this discussion. I also recall, at that time, just like now, ballast water legislation was attached to Coast Guard reauthorization legislation.

I hear concerns about the need to protect and improve states' rights to protect their waters and the citizens and industries that depend on them. For this reason, I supported an amendment by Congressman TIM BISHOP that would strengthen the provision of the ballast water section of the bill to allow states' to enact stronger protections, with federal approval, to ensure they meet key standards.

No legislation is perfect. However, we have a legislative process by which we can work to improve and address concerns. I know that a number of my colleagues spoke during the debate about continuing to work together to improve the ballast water provision. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the Senate further on this issue.

I cast my vote on this amendment reluctantly. I am concerned that simply sending the ballast water issue back to Committee, rather than to the Senate, would have likely been a death knell for further action in the 112th Congress. We have waited long enough. The Great Lakes can't wait. Wisconsin can't wait any further.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source