Alan Simpson: “First, I would like to assure my colleague that I am not opposed to the project she is trying to fund. I am aware of the…”

“First, I would like to assure my colleague that I am not opposed to the project she is trying to fund. I am aware of the project and its importance to Puerto Rico. In a different context, I could support it. In fact, as the previous chairman of the Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, I have worked with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to provide funding for ecosystem restoration projects well above the annual budget request. What I am opposed to is funding the ecosystem restoration projects in a disaster supplemental appropriations bill. A disaster supplemental is not simply a chance to clear the Army Corps of Engineers' construction backlog. That is what the annual appropriations process is for. A disaster supplemental is intended to protect storm-ravaged areas against future storms and to reduce Federal liabilities from future storms. That is why the underlying bill is consistent with previous disaster bills and limits funding to projects that provide real benefits for that type, namely, flood and storm damage reduction projects. Additionally, I would be remiss if I did not point out that the particular project of interest would not even be eligible for funding under this amendment. The underlying bill restricts construction funding to areas impacted by various storms, none of which impacted Puerto Rico. We should not raise hopes knowing the project isn't even eligible.…”