Everybody in the Great Lakes region is for Great Lakes restoration. But about half of the Great Lakes Congressional delegation is also for Great Lakes destruction, in the form of spending billions of taxpayer dollars to wreck wetlands, dig deeper channels, stir up toxins, and introduce more invasive species in ballast water, all to accommodate the largest ocean-going vessels. Time to take a tally on where each Congressional "Great Lakes advocate" stands.
*******************************
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will soon receive a reminder that Congress wants a navigation study of the St. Lawrence Seaway to go only so far.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and other lawmakers are collecting congressional signatures on a letter to the Army Corps, asking for more information about how the agency plans to involve the public in the review and address environmental concerns along the St. Lawrence River.
Their request comes as the Bush administration prepares to send its annual budget to Congress in early February. If the past is any indication, the Army Corps may ask for as much as $1 million to continue the multi-year study, which examines the condition of the shipping route and possible measures to improve it.
Lawmakers have been on a constant watch to see if the Army Corps recommends enlarging the system's locks and deepening the shipping channels or extending navigation into winter, both of which, environmental groups say, could be disastrous to the shoreline. But the letter, which has yet to be made public, may be neutral on those issues because it bears the letterhead of the House and Senate Great Lakes task forces, including proponents of the study.
The conflict between shipping interests and environmentalists is reflected in the split between Midwestern and New York members of Congress on the study. The leading congressional advocate for expanded shipping, Rep. James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., is a co-chairman of the House Great Lakes Task Force.