Dawn Zimmer: “Mr. Chairman, in this latest vote in which the House adopted the Tauzin amendment, the proponents of H.R. 925 have put…”

“Mr. Chairman, in this latest vote in which the House adopted the Tauzin amendment, the proponents of H.R. 925 have put their cards on the table. Their concerns are basically about the Endangered Species Act, wetlands programs, and water rights legislation. If you have substantive problems with these programs, and I have problems with some of these programs, then what we should do is amend the substantive legislation, or we can deauthorize them entirely. If you think the agencies that administer these programs have excess money, then let us defund those agencies to the extent necessary. We can cut the programs and cut the funding. But it makes no sense at all to do what this legislation would do without the Porter amendment, which is create a new multibillion dollar entitlement program that goes way beyond what the Federal Constitution requires and far beyond what any Federal court has interpreted the fifth amendment to mean. It guarantees unlimited litigation and oceans of red ink for the Federal taxpayer. The Porter amendment fixes this situation. The Porter amendment would make Federal regulators more sensitive to takings without creating a new takings entitlement.”