Laserfiche WebLink
<br />CARL H. BRONN <br /> <br />the Senate in 1965-but not the House. <br />[n 1966 this multi-purpose project was authorized-but the purpose of water quality control was <br />left out, except the project could be operated for water quality control provided the beneficiaries <br />~ all costs. <br />Point One: [do not object to that decision to pay. But beneficiaries of the $1 billions voted by <br />the Senate for waste treatment are not to reimburse that cost, as required at Tualatin! Does equity <br />justify this difference in cost-sharing for water quality? <br />Point Two: Waste treatment-as practicable today on the Tualatic-will not solve the water <br />quality dilemma! That is, no matter what is put into waste treatment programs, there'll still be a <br />mess on the Tualatin-Iacking water storage! <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Listen to the experts-"Contractors and builders have built houses and apartments which they <br />cannot hook up to sewage treatment plants because of lack of sufficient water to flush out the streams <br />to maintain an acceptable level of water quality." <br /> <br />And beside dwelling units, industry also is struck a heavy blow-quote "Unemployment is going <br />up at a rapid rate, and each delay or stretching out of the construction schedule only multiplies the <br />, seriousness of the situation." <br /> <br />Unemployment going up, communities going down, and water treatment plant going unused! <br /> <br />Arewe making clear-gentlemen-the significance of(1) interdependency; (2) National objectives; <br />and (3) equity for Federal programs? [s that old pumpkin of a wheel horse-water projects, unfunded <br />-going to drag down the lead and the swing horses on our 'team of programs-so to upset the <br />carriage, and to dump the occupants? <br /> <br />That is just what must be determined-and we plead with the National Water Commission to <br />start doing it-NOW! <br /> <br />Before closing let me assure that leaders on Capitol Hill are sympathetic to your efforts to <br />bring balance to Federal programs. Chairman Ellender advised the Senate-when he introduced the <br />Appropriations Bill-thus: <br />"Unless we assign a higher priority to water resource projects, in a few years we will have a <br />water crisis similar to the one we are now facing in connection with water pollution, To ade, <br />quately satisfy our water needs, we must have both the quantity and the quality available when <br />and where the need arises. , . " <br /> <br />". <br /> <br />Further, the report of the Committee on Appropriations (about the Public Works bill) reveals <br />these facts- <br />-the construction programs of the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation were <br />1.09 percent of the budget in FY 1964. <br />-in this year's bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee raised the Corps and Bureau programs <br />nearly $150 millions over the Administration's figure; yet the water development share of budget <br />dropped to only 0.49%-half the percentage of Budget figure for 1964! <br />-Inflation causes a further reduction in construction potential. Thus the 1970 proposal will <br />build only half of the 1964 program! <br />-but before year 2000, "Americans will need 10 times the power and 2Yz times the water we <br />now consume." <br /> <br />What do you make of these data, summarized for you by TOPS[DE? <br /> <br />-15- <br /> <br />