My office has contacted representatives of the Corps of Engineers and they share our interpretation that this provision, as drafted, cannot adversely impact ratepayers. As stated by my colleague from Arkansas, we have no intention that this provision will raise rates, affect energy production or federal revenues or any other project purposes currently authorized. Conversely, it is our strong view that there are measures that can be taken to assist the tourism and fish and wildlife interests that do not impact adversely the existing project purposes. It is not our intention to have this provision result in loss of generation capacity or increase exposure to ratepayers. It was for this reason that we drafted the language in such an explicit manner.
Dale Bumpers: “My office has contacted representatives of the Corps of Engineers and they share our interpretation that this provision…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a provision related to energy rates and project purposes.
Share
More from Dale Bumpers
I offered this amendment in 1984 when Charles Wick, head of the United States Information Agency, said that he had taped 84 phone calls, including Reagan, Cabinet Members, President Carter. I offered it then, and I got 41 votes. I offered…
This is the amendment that Senator Hatch and I agreed to this morning which would modify the grand jury amendment that I lost. This morning, Senator Hatch and I agreed to a plan that recommended that the issue be submitted to the Judicial…
Let me again echo the very eloquent words of the chairman, and for the purposes of the Record state this has been sort of a festering sore down at the Department of Agriculture for some time. I know the President is personally--very…
I agree mostly with what the Senator from Nebraska said. I prefer a 2-year moratorium. As the Senator from Nebraska stated, earlier this year, we passed a bill to reform the Internal Revenue Service. That legislation arose from the IRS…





