Investing in Our Water Infrastructure

Statement

Much of Central Washington has been transformed from desert to some of the most fertile agricultural lands in the world thanks to Bureau of Reclamation projects. The Pacific Northwest region is also the least carbon-emitting area of our country thanks to a whole series of dams that produce massive amounts of clean, renewable and emissions-free hydroelectricity that keep water pumps running and the lights on.

Unfortunately, these legendary projects are under constant assault from age and the decades of wind, snow and rain that have taken their toll. As a result, vitally important infrastructure relied on by thousands of farmers across the state is at risk and needs to be brought up to 21st Century standards.

The federal agency in charge of many of our infrastructure projects, the Bureau of Reclamation, recently accepted stimulus funds to allocate $1 billion of taxpayer dollars to projects across the nation. While many of these projects are worthwhile, my colleagues and I had hoped that the Bureau would focus on aging infrastructure before starting new projects. It's vitally important that we protect what we have and what works before we involve the Bureau in new projects that will place additional demands on limited maintenance dollars.

The stated purpose of these stimulus projects was to create jobs and immediately revive our economy. My hope, and that of my colleagues on the Natural Resources Committee as well, was that the Bureau would focus limited tax dollars on our nation's water infrastructure needs.

The Bureau did allocate $1 billion to nationwide projects, but admitted they ignored several shovel-ready water projects in California, a state facing severe water shortages. In allocating these funds, the Bureau also made no reforms to reduce overhead costs, no permit streamlining, and gave no assurances to the American taxpayer and water and power ratepayers that their money will be used efficiently and appropriately.

With wind turbines, solar panels, nuclear power, and hydro power, our state is uniquely positioned to be a leader in the upcoming energy debate. Unfortunately, it appears that the Bureau's focus appears to be on promoting unproven and yet-to-be-built green ideas, instead of proven projects that fix our nation's aging infrastructure. With $3 billion in aging water and hydropower infrastructure backlogs, I think it makes much more sense to spend limited taxpayer funds on projects that are clean, renewable, and already in existence.

Source