La. delegation pushes lower cost levee share
Print
Email
Save
Twitter
Social Media
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
WASHINGTON — Soon after her colleagues left the Senate floor late Thursday night after approving $5.8 billion for Louisiana levees, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu rose to criticize the Bush administration.
The Louisiana Democrat joins the rest of the state congressional delegation in calling for what they believe is a more fair policy toward the financial share the state must pay for shoring up the structures.
The measure, attached to a $165 billion emergency war bill, requires the state to pay 35 percent on the federal levee funding. That is $200 million more than the state believes it should pay.
Of even more concern is that Louisiana is being required to pay their share over a three-year period despite the ability of the Bush administration to allow a payback of $1.5 billion of over 30 years.
“No one in Louisiana thinks we have to get these projects for free,” Landrieu said on the floor. “What we ask for is a reasonable share.”
In her speech, Landrieu said she is willing to play nice to negotiate a better match. But she added that she intends to tie up the Senate by objecting to bills that come to the floor before the August recess if the administration doesn’t change its stance.
“This bill gets us part of the way,” Landrieu said of the money approved Thursday. “But we still have a long way to go.”
Gov. Bobby Jindal sent a letter to Senate leaders earlier in the week making the same pitch. Landrieu sent a letter to President Bush on Friday requesting a change in the match share rules.
“Without long-term financing, Louisiana will face an unprecedented challenge in meeting the requirements of the non-federal cost share,” Landrieu wrote. “Notably, the state may have to dedicate up to one-third of its discretionary budget toward the expenses, crippling ongoing recovery efforts.”
Landrieu pointed to the 1986 Water Resources Development Act which allows the match share to be stretched out “over a period of not more than 30 years from the date of completion of the project.”
Jindal is also trying to get the state portion lowered by $200 million, contending that the across-the-board 35 percent rate fails to take into account levees that were built with state match rates of 20, 25 and 30 percent.
U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., said he too will push for a better cost share. Vitter has introduced a stand-alone bill to correct the matter, which could all be revisited in two weeks. U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is pushing for a new emergency supplement to aid Midwest flood victims.
The Louisiana Democrat joins the rest of the state congressional delegation in calling for what they believe is a more fair policy toward the financial share the state must pay for shoring up the structures.
The measure, attached to a $165 billion emergency war bill, requires the state to pay 35 percent on the federal levee funding. That is $200 million more than the state believes it should pay.
Of even more concern is that Louisiana is being required to pay their share over a three-year period despite the ability of the Bush administration to allow a payback of $1.5 billion of over 30 years.
“No one in Louisiana thinks we have to get these projects for free,” Landrieu said on the floor. “What we ask for is a reasonable share.”
In her speech, Landrieu said she is willing to play nice to negotiate a better match. But she added that she intends to tie up the Senate by objecting to bills that come to the floor before the August recess if the administration doesn’t change its stance.
“This bill gets us part of the way,” Landrieu said of the money approved Thursday. “But we still have a long way to go.”
Gov. Bobby Jindal sent a letter to Senate leaders earlier in the week making the same pitch. Landrieu sent a letter to President Bush on Friday requesting a change in the match share rules.
“Without long-term financing, Louisiana will face an unprecedented challenge in meeting the requirements of the non-federal cost share,” Landrieu wrote. “Notably, the state may have to dedicate up to one-third of its discretionary budget toward the expenses, crippling ongoing recovery efforts.”
Landrieu pointed to the 1986 Water Resources Development Act which allows the match share to be stretched out “over a period of not more than 30 years from the date of completion of the project.”
Jindal is also trying to get the state portion lowered by $200 million, contending that the across-the-board 35 percent rate fails to take into account levees that were built with state match rates of 20, 25 and 30 percent.
U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La., said he too will push for a better cost share. Vitter has introduced a stand-alone bill to correct the matter, which could all be revisited in two weeks. U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., is pushing for a new emergency supplement to aid Midwest flood victims.
 | ||||
| Most Popular | Most Emailed | Hot Topics | ||
