Peter Visclosky: “Mr. Chairman, I rise to join the chairman in strong opposition to this amendment. First of all, coastal shore protection…”

“Mr. Chairman, I rise to join the chairman in strong opposition to this amendment. First of all, coastal shore protection projects are equivalent to flood protection for inland communities. This proposal places storm damage prevention and shore protection projects at a cost-sharing disadvantage with comparable inland flood control projects. It will disproportionately affect poor communities which will be unable to raise adequate funds for these projects. It also violates the cost-sharing agreements already in place for some ongoing shore protection projects. It abrogates existing, ongoing, long-term contracts with non-Federal sponsors, and it is inconsistent with the agreed cost-sharing adopted by the WRDA legislation of 1986. Mr. Chairman, I am strongly opposed to the gentleman's amendment.”