This excerpt from the United States (US) Congressional record, dated May 2, 1953, contains debate over an appropriations bill to which US Representative Usher L. Burdick offers an amendment to reduce the appropriation to the US Corps of Army Engineers for continued construction on the Garrison Dam and Reservoir.
Included in the debate over Burdick\u27s amendment are representatives Gordon L. McDonough, Hubert Scudder and Craig Hosmer of California, Glen Davis of Wisconsin, Donald W. Nicholson of Massachusetts, John Taber of New York, and Otto G. Krueger of North Dakota, who spoke out against Burdick\u27s amendment.
Burdick\u27s rationale in reducing the appropriation for the Corps of Army Engineers was that they were, without authorization from the US Congress, increasing the surface area and raising the pool level of the reservoir, endangering the city of Williston and nearby irrigation facilities along the Missouri River, and were seizing land to accommodate these increases of area and pool height, and that reducing their appropriation would limit these activities.
See also:
Drafts of Resolution by Representative Burdick Regarding Pool Level of Garrison Dam Reservoir, Undatedhttps://commons.und.edu/burdick-papers/1428/thumbnail.jp

Burdick, Usher

US Congress

English

UND Scholarly Commons (University of North Dakota)

University of North Dakota UND Scholarly Commons Usher Burdick Papers Elwyn B. Robinson Department of Special Collections 5-27-1953 Excerpt from Congressional Record Regarding Amendment Proposed by Representative Burdick to Reduce Appropriation to Corps of Army Engineers, May 27, 1953 US Congress Usher Burdick Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/burdick-papers Recommended Citation US Congress and Burdick, Usher, "Excerpt from Congressional Record Regarding Amendment Proposed by Representative Burdick to Reduce Appropriation to Corps of Army Engineers, May 27, 1953" (1953). Usher Burdick Papers. 420. https://commons.und.edu/burdick-papers/420 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Elwyn B. Robinson Department of Special Collections at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Usher Burdick Papers by an authorized administrator of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact und.commons@library.und.edu. PLEASE RETURN 0 CONGRESSMAN BURDICK 1953 - \ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 5915 we cannot meet the competition that we must meet. At the present time there are 35 foreign sh ips hauling lumber f:rom British Columbia to our Atlantic coast. Foreign lumber is coming in here while we ar e not permit ted to load a ship and move lumber from the west coast to the east coast. Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SCUDDER. I yield. Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr . Chairman, I believe my colleague, the gentleman from California, h as a very worthy proj-ect. It is economical in the sense that it will provide for the shipment of a large quantity of virgin lumber from the northern part of California, '\\J'.hich n ow cannot be market ed because of t he lack of facilities in Humboldt Harbor. Mr. SCUDDER. That is right. There is 1 lumber company from New York that invested $3 ½ million and they are shipping lumber from there to th e east coast. But they cannot fully load in that harbor and get it out because it costs an·extra $5,000 to $8,900 per sh ip to move it. Mr. HOSMER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield ? , Mr. SCUDDER. I yield. Mr. HOSMER. Do I underst and as a result of this amendment by which you propose to spend $500,000, the Fed-eral Government will get ba ck half again that much in a year's time in revenue? Mr. SCUDDER . That is right. Mr. HOSMER. This certain ly seems like a good deal, and an economical and a sensible project. Mr. SCUDDER. Eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars of lumber a year can be purchased in that area :from the Federal Government, and the whole project calls for only $500,000. I be-lieve-I know that the Feder al Govern-ment will make money on this project . You are simply allowing our natural re-.3ources to go to waste. Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr . Chair-man, this is another meritorious project, but ft is a new start, and therefore I do not believe it proper to appropria t e funds for it at this time. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered ·by the gen tle-m an from California [Mr. ScuDDER J. The amen dment was r ejected. Mr. BURDICK. Mr. Chairman, I of-.fer an amendment wh ich is at the desk. The Clerk read as fallows : Amendment offer ed y Mr. B URDICK : On p age 4, line 5, after the figure "$254,123,000" , insert "of which n ot m ore t h a n $250,123,000 sha ll be ob ligated durin g t h e fisca l year b e -ginn ing July 1, 1953." Mr. BURDICK. Mr. Chairman, the reason why th e first amen dmen t did not apply is that you boosted the amot:mt during the debate. Now I h ave reduced the amount to which you boosted it by $4 million. If some of you gentlemen who wanted to get a project in your distr ict had let me talk a little while before, you would have h ad some money to use. But you were determin ed to do all the talking. Now go and get the money. Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield ? Mr. BURDICK. I always yield to the gentleman from Cape Cod. · Mr. NICHOLSON. I might ask the gentleman from North Dakota just one question. I have tried to the best of my ability, which is not too much, I guess. Mr. BURDICK. To which I agree. Mr. NICHOLSON. To get something for my distr ict here in the Congress. So far I have not been able to do it. If the gentleman from North Dakot a will show me how, I certainly should use that m ethod. Mr. BURDICK . Well, if you will sit down I will try to sh ow you. When this project was auth orized it provided for approximately 1,830 feet level of water. Everything was planned accordingly. I was in the Congress wheh t hat was done, and I wanted to make sure that our ir rigat ion projects would be protected . 8 '.) v.re wrote into that bill, as it passed this House, that th e building of th is reservoir should _ n ever a t any time intei·f ere with our op-erating the irriga t ion plants or the city of Williston . I though t t hat settled it . But now the Army engineers, of their . own volition, h ave come along and they want 20 feet h igher water. That means that the ir r igation plants in the areas will be drowned out , and a city of 16,000 people will be drown ed out , and the wa -ter system and the only railroad dr owned out. Th en they in turn say, ''We will protect you. Don't worry about us. We are for you." J ust like this commit-tee is for you fellows. We are for you. Now they propose dikes. They propose to build dikes, and this very moment they are out buying land in my sect ion of th e country for the purpose of build-ing dikes.· A 1,830-foot flood will not fill up tha t reservoir until 12 or 15 years. So you are spending $4 million this afternoon to buy land for dikes tha t this Congress knows nothing about. Now, if tha t is good business·, go ah ead and do it. I suppose you noticed this after -noon that I became very conservat ive. I voted against th e attempt to raise this amount of money, and I vot ed with the Committee. Now I want the 1Committee to vot e with me. I am cut ting it down. Mr. TABER. Mr. Chairm an, will the gentleman yield? Mr . BURDICK. I yield. Mr. TABER. How do they propose to get the water that seeps through the dike back into the river ? Mr. BURDICK. Of course they will never do it. This Congress knows noth-ing about dikes built on th e quicksands of the Missouri -River. I h ave lived up there a ll my life and I know all about it. You cannot build a dike on that forma -t ion that will not seep water, and you cannot protect those irr igation plan ts, because that water will seep through and destroy all of the agricultural land. There will not be a basement in Williston tha t will not be full of water. Of course, the cen ter of business activity is not going to the south at all. It is going to Williston. I think this is just a conspir-acy to t ry to drown out our town ahead of time. What is the use of putting all that money out 12 years before you need it? If you strike this out-this has been a burning politica l question in North Da-kota; there a re a lot of people for it and an awful lot of them against it, and I know in congressional ba t tles those who have been for a h igh dam are still up there. • Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Chairman, will the gen t leman yield? Mr. BURDICK. I yield . . Mr. McDONOUGH. Is not this the same issue that Mr. Lemke fought, bled, and died for on the floor of this House for a long time? Mr. BURDICK. Yes ; and I did every. thing that he did except die. When Congress gets a chance to hold hearings on this question of a larger pool and a h igher water level, and the possi-bility of dike protection to our irriga-tion proj ects, th e city of Williston and the Grea t Northern Railroad I am sure Congress will not authorize any such fantastic enterprise, and in the mean-t ime this reduction in the appropriation will keep the Army engineers from going any further , without authority, to seize land around the Williston and drive the owners off , when this river bed will not be raised to an 1830 level for the next 12 t o 15 years. We h ave time enough to h ave Congress understand what the Army engineers are trying to do, and t ime enough to invest igate the feasibility and the necessity of their proposed dike projects. Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-man, I r ise in opposition to the amend-ment and yield to the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. KRUEGER]. Mr. KRUEGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by my distin guished colleague from North Dakota [Mr . BURDICK]. It is un-doubtedly appa rent that the senior mem-ber of the congressional delegation from North Dakota [Mr. BURDICK], is the larger half, but I am speaking frankly when I say I represent the greater por-t ion of the population of North Dakota . The sum which my colleague would take out of th e bill he says is the sum necessary to acquire land that might possibly be flooded when the Garrison Dam is filled .to it s full height of 1,850 feet level. Personally, I do not blame my friend, th e gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. BURDICK] , a great deal because he has a personal int erest in the matter. May I point out that he is in er ror in th e m at ter of representation. He says he represen ts a whole lot of North Dakota people although ther e are some who are against it. I assure you that the great majority of the people of North Dakota are for the higher dam level and t:oe Congress h as approved it several years ago. Th e Army engineers thoroughly in-vestigated the design of the dam and reservoir; those ·matters were approved long ago. The proposed appropr iation for Garrison Dam has alr.eady been twice reduced. The so-called Truman budget approved $39 million; the revised budget reduced the amount to $31 million; and the committee in its effort to curtail ex-penses and exercise economy reduced it f urther to $27 million. Now the gen-., I , . . ,. = PLEASE RETURN 1 u 0 GRESSMAN BURDICK 5016 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE May 27 tleman from Nor th Dakota, my friend Mr. BURDICK, comes alon g and wants to r educe it by an additional $4 million. The $27 million is necessary at this time to proceed in the construction of the Garrison Oam in an orderly manner. Much of the dam is already complet ed. The closure ceremony is scheduled with-in a few days. Many of you Members h ave been invited, and I h ave r eplies saying that you will atten d the closing ceremony at Garrison Dam. I th ink you who go there will see and hear for your-selves that the higher level of the dam, which has long been approved, is no longer an issue. This matter of prohib-iting the acquesition of land which may be inundated by the higher level is a back-door entrance to prevent the con-struction of the dam at Garrison to the higher level. I am opposing the amend-ment and I hope it is defeated. Mr. DA VIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-man, this project is over 70 percent com-pleted. Other Congresse1;; have passed on this matter of the height of the dam. The Corps of Engineers has given us assurances with respect to their ability to handle the construction of the dikes in this area. This is not a saving of money, because every dollar this would save now would deprive the Federal Government of $7.50 in revenue that would be obtainable an-nually as a result of the increased eleva-tion of the pool. I think it would be unwise to adopt the amendment. Mr. BURDICK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? ' Mr. DA VIS of Wisconsin. I x_ield to the gentleman from North Dakota. Mr. BURDICK. Is the gentleman prepared to tell this committee that the building of those dikes is a practical and a safe proposition for the people and for the agricultural land as well as the city of Williston? Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. That is the assurance we have had in testimony by the Corps of Engineers. Mr. BURDICK. Is that the gentle-m an's opinion? Mr. DA VIS of Wisconsin. I am not an expert on it. Mr. BURDICK. The gentleman has not had a hearing on it? Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Yes. Mr . BURDICK. Who was there be-sides the Engineers? Mr. DA VIS of Wisconsin. The Corps of Engineers testified on this particular project and there was a statement filed with the commit tee at a subsequent date on the ery point. The CHAIRMAN. The question is on t he amendment offered by t he gent leman from North Dakota [Mr. BURDICK] . The question was taken; and on a di-vision (demanded by Mr. DAVIS of Wis-consin) there were-ayes 126, noes 67. Mr. NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman, I demand tellers. Tellers were ref used. So the amendment was a greed to. r. MAGNUSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offer ed by Mr. MAGNUSON : On p age 4, line 5, after t h e sum insert "an a d d itional sum, $14,079,000, to be allocated as follows: "Chief Joseph Dam, $2,000,000; ''Albeni Falls Dam, $1 ,200,000; "McNary Lock and Dam, $2,700,000; "The Dalles Dam, $8,179,000." Joseph Dam would be increased from $23 million to $25 million. McNary lock and dam would be in-creased from $25 million to $27,700,000·. The Dalles Dam would be increased from $29,250,000 to $37,429,000. Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. Chairman, the Albeni Falls Dam in Idaho would be P acific Northwest r esource-development boosted from $6 million to $7,200,000. and flood-control program will suffer The budget cuts made by the com-severely unless the Congress acts to pro- mittee-and let me say that I share the vide sufficient funds for continuing or- commit tee's commendable desire to derly plannin g and construction of sev- economize-would delay completion of eral important projects under the juris- these projects, to which we are irrevo-diction of the Corps of Engineers. cably committed, and delay arrival of the I have been deeply disappointed by the day when the benefits and earnings of drastic slashes made by the Appropria- these dams will begin to be realized. tions Commit tee in funds for a number r urge approval of my amendment, of the key projects in the Pacific North- which would restore the funds requested west. It will be noted that no planning in the budget, and which are the small-or construction funds are provided for est amounts that we economically should the. important Eagle Gorge Dam and pr ovide. Reservoir, on the Green River, near Seat- . Mr. HAND. Mr. Chairman, will the t le, a stream that periodically floods, to gentleman yield? cause tremendous damage and to threat- Mr. MAGNUSON. I yield to the gen-en defense production and t ransporta- tleman from New Jersey. tion in the area. Mr. HAND. I wonder if the gentle-Another important project for which man thinks he might not unwittingly be no funds a re provided by the committee doing the people in his area a disservice is the Ice Harbor Lock and Dam , on the by asking for $14 million additional at Snake River, not far from the great this time and whether he does not agree Hanford Atomic Works. The power and with me that the committee and the the navigat ion aid which would be pro- Congress over a period of time have been vided by the Ice Harbor Dam would be extremely generous to the Pacific North-of tremendous value to t his a rea. west. Deep cuts were made by the committee Mr. MAGNUSON. I agree with the in funds needed for the complet ion of gentleman that the Congress has been projects which are now under way. I generous, and I think that its generosity believe that most of us will a gree-, that will pay off. From an economic stand-the sooner we can place new generators point, I mean. I do not believe projects in production the sooner we can pay off, such as these are or should be settled on through earnings on the sale of power, the basis of generosity or friendship. the cost of installing those genera tors. They must be economically sound, and I The heavy cut in the appropr iation for assure you that the public power program The Dalles Dam means tha t completion of the Pacific Northwest qualifies for of this great project, on which more than that characterization. $24 million already h as been spent, will I want to emphasize that these items be delayed another year, or quite likely that I would like to have restored to the 2 yea rs. The longer we delay, the longer bill were approved by the Bureau of the the Pacific Northwest will suffer from its Budget, and I hope that this Committet:. great power shortage, and the longer will of the Whole House will approve my be the time before we can start r eturn- amendment. ing to the Treasury t he earnings from (Mr. METCALF asked and was given the sale of The Dalles power. permisston to extend his remarks at tb is I feel that it is false economy to delay point in the RECORD.) complet ion of this project. I feel it is Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman, I also false economy to cut th e amounts support the amendment offered by the n eeded for construction of Albeni Falls gentleman from Washington because I Dam , Chief Joseph Dam, and McNary am familiar with the power shortage in Lock and Dam. the Columbia Basin. The Columbi: The minimum tha t Congress should River which rises in Canada and flowt approve is the amount r equested for through my own district in Montana is these projects in the budget submit ted the last large untapped reservoir of by the White House. Personally, I feel power in the United States. It is im-tha t some of these budget items were portant that this vast power potential unnecessarily low, but, in any event, t h ey be fully ut ilized in order for the entire are the minimum needed to see t hat the Nation to have the benefit of the alu-generators start producing power for the minum, the fer tilizers, the minerals and energy-hungry Pacific Northwest. the t imber of the region. Th e t remen-My amendment would increase this dously important defense plants along construction item in the bill by $14,079,- the Columbia devour increased power 000, which would raise to the level of the faster than we are able to supply it. so-called Eisenhower budget amounts These big projects in the Northwest appropriated for continuing work on four sh ould not be slowed down, rather they P acific Northwest multipurpose dams , should be accelerated in order to pre-which are under construction. pare to meet the power load that is in-Th e four dams under construction to creasing year by year. which t his $14,079,000 would be allo- When Bonneville Dam and Grand cated, under my amendment, are : Chief Coulee Dam were first st ar ted it was 

Excerpt from Congressional Record Regarding Amendment Proposed by Representative Burdick to Reduce Appropriation to Corps of Army Engineers, May 27, 1953

https://commons.und.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1428&context=burdick-papers

Excerpt from Congressional Record Regarding Amendment Proposed by Representative Burdick to Reduce Appropriation to Corps of Army Engineers, May 27, 1953

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UND Scholarly Commons (University of North Dakota)