Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act of 2005
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 2005 -- (House of Representatives - September 29, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I will support the bipartisan substitute amendment by my colleagues, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Boehlert) because it is an honest effort to make it a better alternative that does not include the most egregious parts of the underlying bill.
I would, however, just make one point. I take modest exception to the implication that was made from the other side of the aisle that somehow the Endangered Species Act and environmental legislation had something to do with the tragedy we witnessed unfurl in the Katrina-affected region. The GAO presented a report yesterday saying that the delays in the project, that none of the changes are believed to have had any role in the levee breaches. And, in fact, Corps officials believe that the flooding would have been worse if the original proposed design had been built. That was presented to Congress yesterday by the GAO.
This is contentious enough, Mr. Chairman, so it would be nice if we could stick to the facts and not make implications that somehow the environmental legislation had anything to do with that tragedy. Knowledgeable people understand that in the long run environmental legislation, had it been enforced and applied uniformly, would have made things better.
Mr. Chairman, I submit for the RECORD the GAO report I just referred to.
Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection Project
WHAT GAO FOUND
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in reluctant support of this amendment. I have serious concerns about the changes to the current Endangered Species Act being discussed today, both in the underlying bill and this amendment. I am especially frustrated that both bills repeal the critical habitat provisions of the ESA, which are crucial to the recovery of species. I plan to vote against final passage of any legislation that repeals this important provision.
But I will support the bipartisan substitute amendment by my colleagues Mr. Miller and Mr. Boehlert because it is an honest effort to present an alternative. It does not include the most egregious parts of H.R. 3824 which make a mockery of science and conservation.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov