Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2013
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. MORAN. I rise as well in very strong opposition to this amendment that prohibits funding for the National Ocean Policy. The purpose of this policy is to improve our Nation's ocean management effort, protect and create jobs, and grow our economy by ensuring all the multiple uses of the ocean are coordinated in a more seamless manner.
Far from a heavy-handed directive, as it's being described, the National Ocean Policy will actually streamline government programs and regulations. It will reduce bureaucratic red tape. And perhaps most importantly, it enlists local stakeholders in the decision-making process. And it shouldn't be a partisan issue.
The National Ocean Policy was a cornerstone recommendation of both the independent Pew Oceans Commission, which was chaired by current Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, and by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, appointed by George W. Bush. Both commissions called for harmonizing the responsibilities of the 27 different Federal agencies with jurisdiction over some aspect of ocean management.
As my colleagues can imagine, the current arrangement has led to ineffective management of resources, inefficient use of taxpayer dollars, and increased conflicts among a growing number of ocean users. Strategic planning maximizes organizational efficiency and use of public resources.
The National Ocean Policy will improve opportunities for community and citizen participation in the planning process and facilitate sustainable economic growth by providing transparency and predictability for economic investments. It represents a science-based strategy to align conservation and restoration goals at the Federal, State, tribal, local, and regional levels, and it will strengthen the integration of Federal and non-Federal ocean observing systems and data management into one national system.
Of particular interest to me, the Chesapeake Bay--I know it is to Chairman Wolf as well--is poised to benefit from the National Ocean Policy action plan. It will help advance the bay's health, from increasing public school education about the Chesapeake Bay region to creating a mapping tool for the Chesapeake Bay watershed that allows stakeholders to share information and ideas for land protection and restoration.
It calls for the establishment of a National Shellfish Initiative, in partnership with commercial and restoration aquaculture communities, which includes pilot projects to explore the ecosystem benefits of shellfish aquaculture while increasing shellfish production in U.S. waters. That's so important for our economy. In fact, all oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are critical components of our Nation's economy. U.S. coastal communities are home to more than half of all Americans. They generate an estimated $8 trillion a year and they support 69 million jobs.
Declining ocean health and a lack of effective coordination is putting this great economic engine at risk. Comprehensive planning will ensure the stability of the Nation's seaports as additional users of ocean space evolve, including the responsible development of offshore energy resources.
But we must make no mistake: This attempt to defund and delay the National Ocean Policy is a dangerous political move that puts the health of our oceans, coastal communities, jobs, and our fishing industry at risk. We need to protect, maintain, and to restore the health of our oceans and coasts. Continuing to develop the National Ocean Policy offers our Nation the best path forward.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this misguided amendment and to do something that is very much needed for our economy, for our oceans and particularly for our coastal communities. Let's do the right thing. Let's get all these users organized and working together in pursuit of a streamlined consistent constructive policy. It's the right thing to do. This amendment is not. Let's defeat this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source