On the recordDecember 9, 2016
So in the dark of night--I think that is the part where the States are going to be told: You are just going to have to build a dam. That is it. We decided. Then everybody calls us and says: Wait a minute, wait a minute, I don't want to dam the river or I want that stream to produce fish or I want that to flow downstream for people further downstream, not right here. All of that has basically now been given over to someone else. I would also like to ask the Senator from California if she is aware of provisions of the bill, as people are referring to it, that jilt the taxpayers? I know there are a bunch of groups, Taxpayers for Common Sense and even the Heritage Foundation--all of these people are basically calling out the ridiculous spending aspect of this California provision. I wonder if the Senator from California is aware that this basically authorizes prepayment on construction obligations that basically are going to take millions of dollars out of the U.S. Treasury. Just by passing this legislation, we would be taking money out of the Treasury, resulting in basically $1.2 billion in receipts that we would have, but giving us a loss of $807 million. This is a provision in the bill that I think has had little discussion, and this sweetheart deal for people is going to rip off the taxpayers, in addition to all of this authorization that is in the legislation. Is my colleague from California aware of this provision?





