House lawmakers on Monday teed up debate on a major waterways bill, which is expected to draw Democratic opposition for not including emergency funding for lead-stricken communities such as Flint, Mich., or a provision related to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
The House Rules Committee backed debate guidelines for the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that would automatically adopt a substitute amendment and allow lawmakers to vote on more than two dozen amendments on the House floor later this week.
The underlying measure authorizes dozens of water-related infrastructure projects around the country to boost the nation’s ports, harbors and dams. The bill would be offset by deauthorizing previously approved projects that are no longer viable.
To the dismay of Democrats, the legislation will not include an amendment submitted by Rep. Dan Kildee (D-Mich.) to provide $220 million in direct emergency assistance for communities like Flint that have lead-contaminated water supplies.
A Senate-passed version of WRDA included a fully offset Flint package, but the House Transportation and Infrastructure panel did not have the same jurisdiction as the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to include the language.
Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), chairman of the Transportation Committee, said during the rules meeting that the issue could be dealt with in conference committee negotiations.
But Shuster added that he had concerns with the federal government stepping in with a problem that was created at the state and local level.
Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), ranking member on the Transportation Committee, told The Hill that the Rules Committee “regularly waives points of order” and they could have done so if leadership really wanted to include Flint funding.
Lawmakers rebuffed an effort from Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) to waive a budgetary point of order against Kildee’s Flint amendment.
The administration did not issue a veto threat, but said in a statement of administrative policy that it "should be improved with additional reforms and elimination of problematic provisions."
Debate over the appropriate vehicle
Republican leadership has said the WRDA bill is the appropriate vehicle for Flint funding, and defended a stop-gap spending bill that includes funding for Louisiana flood victims while lacking Flint aid.
But Democrats have wanted stronger assurances that Flint aid would be added during efforts to combine the two chambers' bills, which likely won’t occur until after the November elections.
“I simply ask that I not be put in a position of continually being told it’s the other legislation that ought to include [flint aid],” Kildee said. “Talking to somebody about the [continuing resolution], they say it should be in WRDA. Than I hear from some folks who say it’s not appropriate in WRDA.”
Democrats have grown increasingly wary about whether Flint aid will actually get added in the WRDA conference, especially after GOP leadership decided to drop Democratic language from the WRDA bill related to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
The provision — which was included in the version easily approved by the Transportation Committee earlier this year — would have ensured that money collected for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is actually used for upkeep at ports and harbors. More than 40 percent of the fund’s revenue has been diverted to offset other congressional spending over the past decade.
The House Rules panel said on its website that the rules committee removed that section of the bill in order to "ensure compliance with the Rules of the House and the Congressional Budget Act."
“It authorizes the appropriations committee without their consent,” said Rules Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas).
Shuster agreed with Democrats that addressing the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund issue is critical, but said that “budgetary rules are complicated.”
“It’s wrong for people to pay a user fee and not go towards its intended purposes,” he said. “This is something we got to figure out.”
Democrats have also slammed the WRDA measure for authorizing a Texas project that would build splash parks, baseball fields and covered basketball courts.
DeFazio unsuccessfully pushed to include an amendment that would have prohibited the Army Corps of Engineers budget from being used on sports fields and splash parks and would require the Texas project to be economically justified.
“If they’re going to do things like that, maybe we can find a couple hundred million dollars so we don’t poison kids,” DeFazio told The Hill.
