On the recordOctober 15, 1998
I think now the gentlewoman is drifting over into my area of expertise, and that is American humor, with the argument for this legislation that somehow because we pump the sand up on the beaches from the Federal OCS, the Outer Continental Shelf, that it is just a loan, because then the sand goes back to the Outer Continental Shelf, which is probably accurate. But what is not a loan is the taxpayer dollars to continue to do this year after year after year as we try to defeat nature because of storms and hurricanes and what have you. I think this bill is seriously flawed in the sense of the kind of revenues that it loses, and it raises questions about whether or not we are really engaging in products that simply are not feasible when we are trying to allow development and activities on lands that are subject to nature in terms of the storm patterns that develop annually along the eastern sea coast. I might also mention that the administration has sent both a letter and a statement of administration policy against this legislation for the reasons that I have raised with respect to the cost of this, the direct spending, which they estimate will be about $10 million over the next few years, and they believe that the Secretary ought to be able to continue to charge those fees.
Source
govinfo.gov




