I rise in support of the amendment. It does not add cost. It does not add any burden on the process, but it does add an element of review in the evaluation of these plans and that is to take into consideration sea level rise that's already happening on our sea coasts, on our salt water coasts. And the addition of this factor, I think, will make all of the planners sensitive to the effects, the erosions, shore line erosion effects of rise of water levels and their consequential effects on the health of the estuaries. I appreciate the gentlewoman's amendment.
James Oberstar: “I rise in support of the amendment. It does not add cost. It does not add any burden on the process, but it does add an…”
Editor's note · Context
The speaker supports an amendment addressing sea level rise in planning evaluations.
Share
More from James Oberstar
I, too, have natural resources--national forests, national parks, wildlife refuges. When fire, as it does regularly, strikes the national forest, that land regenerates. The oil destroys. It likely cannot be restored by itself or by human…
The City of Marquette kept its part of the agreement, conveyed property to the Coast Guard for $1, and now is going to be stuck with the bill. The problem is that the way the transfer worked out, the statutory PAYGO rules preclude…
We must move away from complete reliance on public funding for infrastructure and forge a new, stronger connection between private capital and infrastructure needs.
The diverse water resources challenges throughout the United States are often studied, planned, and managed in individual 'silos,' independently of other water areas and projects.





