Providing for the Operations of the Federal Columbia River Power System

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. JAYAPAL. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I make this motion today in order to ensure that the millions of Americans who rely on public power can continue receiving affordable power. President Trump, in his latest budget, has proposed charging millions of Americans more for their electricity.

The President wants to charge Americans what he calls market-based rates, which means that millions of Americans who rely on public power will pay more than what they pay now. This proposal has rightly provoked bipartisan opposition, and I hope my Republican colleagues will join me in rejecting this ill-advised proposal which will result in higher bills for millions of our constituents.

Mr. Speaker, I should also add that the underlying bill is based on a false premise that rates can be lowered by shirking our responsibilities to protect our environment, restore our salmon populations, and follow the law. After all, restoring our region's salmon populations will reduce our costs in the long run.

This underlying bill takes us in the wrong direction, and it is important to include some context on this complicated issue.

Starting in the 1930s, the Federal Government began the construction of 31 hydroelectric dams on the Columbia River. These dams which make up the Federal Columbia River Power System, or the FCRPS, provide public power throughout the Pacific Northwest.

However, it has become clear that they have operated in ways that pose serious threats to our region's salmon runs and violate our environmental laws. Several courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Oregon U.S. District Court, have ruled as such. The courts ordered a new biological opinion, as well as a NEPA review, in order to bring the plans in alignment with Federal law.

Rather than letting this critical process continue, H.R. 3144 aims to circumvent our court system and the law by blocking legally ordered salmon protection measures. Congress should not be in the business of closing the door on legal and regulatory review processes simply because some Members don't like them.

Some claim that the court process will make it more expensive for ratepayers due to decisions like the one to increase spill over the dams, which this bill would illegally block. This process, which is meant to release additional water over the tops of the dams to ensure that juvenile salmon can migrate out, is a critical step in increasing salmon recovery rates. It is currently up for debate whether or not ratepayers will see an increase of any sort in the costs in the short term, but the long-term benefits of changes like this one are indisputable.

The 13 species of steelhead and salmon that are threatened by these dams are crucial to our region, and our fishing industry relies on them for its survival.

In 2011, Mr. Speaker, 34,500 jobs were provided by a healthy sport fishing industry which contributed more than $3.8 billion to the economy in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. And according to a recent poll in Washington State, a strong majority of voters are actually willing to pay up to $7 a month in additional costs in order to save our wild salmon and improve water quality because they know how incredibly important it is to all of our economies and our communities.

Whether or not the increase spill will raise costs, that is not clear, but what is clear is that conserving these critical populations is a priority for the people in the Pacific Northwest.

The irony, Mr. Speaker, is that H.R. 3144 will ultimately cost our ratepayers even more money in the long term. Protecting our salmon populations is 100 percent necessary. It is our obligation under the Endangered Species Act. So simply closing our eyes and hoping this all goes away is not an option.

Additionally, the Native peoples of the Pacific Northwest have the undeniable treaty rights to catch these salmon and steelhead at accustomed places, meaning that these populations have to be maintained. We can't continue to fail to uphold our end of this deal, and this bill will move us further away from where we need to be.

This issue has been addressed, and the review process mandated by the courts is doing just that. By denying the opportunity to implement the necessary science-based changes required to bring the FCRPS in line with Federal law, H.R. 3144 will cost ratepayers more down the line. Restoring the salmon population will be incredibly expensive, and gutting fisheries protections and kicking the can down the road does not serve our ratepayers well.

We must move forward with the ongoing biological opinion review and the NEPA process, but we also have to ensure that we are continuing to be mindful of our ratepayers in the region. This bill will ultimately cost ratepayers more, not less.

Mr. Speaker, it is possible to find a solution that works.

I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source