Jared Huffman: “I, unfortunately, must oppose this amendment. I am not sure if it was the intent of my friend, Mr. LaMalfa, but it…”

“I, unfortunately, must oppose this amendment. I am not sure if it was the intent of my friend, Mr. LaMalfa, but it appears that this amendment would prioritize permitting surface storage projects under the WIIN Act and not groundwater storage WIIN Act projects. The WIIN Act, of course, authorized money for both surface and groundwater storage projects. These projects are yet to be named and prioritized. That still needs to happen. Yet this amendment applies this bill's streamlining provisions to WIIN's ``State-led projects for new surface water storage projects.'' Now, providing surface storage above all other types of water infrastructure projects certainly is in keeping with some of the obsession with new dams that we have heard from my colleagues across the aisle. But the truth is, there are all sorts of other worthy projects that are needed if we are going to get serious about water infrastructure in California; and to put a thumb on the scale for one particular kind is not the right way to go. So, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Lowenthal The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in part B of House Report 115-186.”