Blake Moore: “I understand that some are arguing that maintaining the ``status quo'' in states can set disparate ballast standards is…”

“I understand that some are arguing that maintaining the ``status quo'' in states can set disparate ballast standards is better than moving any legislation establishing a stronger national ballast water standard, which is widely agreed upon as a necessary tool in our fight against waterborne invasive species. While I share their concerns about the need to address this issue, I cannot support that stance. We need a national ballast water standard and if the House does not take a position in this bill, I am afraid that this issue will once again fall off the Congressional agenda. I feared a yes vote on the Slaughter-Dingell amendment--which would strip out the ballast water section altogether--would take away the last realistic chance for the House to consider this issue. This concern is relevant given that the ``Super Committee'' is set to dominate the legislative agenda in both Chambers, and after that, the upcoming elections. The House last passed legislation setting a national ballast water standard in 2007. We can't wait another four years to even begin this discussion. I also recall, at that time, just like now, ballast water legislation was attached to Coast Guard reauthorization legislation. I hear concerns about the need to protect and improve states' rights to protect their waters and the citizens and industries that depend on them.…”