Editorial: Bush's 2006 Budget Plan Foils Waterways Again

Once again leaders in the waterway transportation industry are queuing up for their annual effort to restore cuts and otherwise beef up an obviously inadequate proposed 2006 civil works budget for the Army Corps of Engineers. As the President Bush's budget proposal now stands, hopes that waterways would finally get sufficient funds are foiled.

Chief of Engineers Carl A. Strock said, "The budget does not address all our needs, but we have to be mindful of the war on terror and the tight budget environment." That's a fair response from a good soldier.

However, one wonders if the world stops spinning because we've been distracted by major events? As the broadcast media and print press keep reminding us, there is great conflict among politicos over proposed overhaul of the Social Security and healthcare systems, but life still must go on. We must consider long-term priorities. If ever there was a priority for the United States, it is proper maintenance for transportation infrastructure. The segment of that infrastructure that moves some 13 percent of our domestic product is being neglected.

Railroads and truck lines are becoming overstressed. Environmental concerns have rocketed to the fore. In the meantime we are turning a cold shoulder to the mode that can provide relief to railroads and trucking firms and contribute toward improving safety and environmental conditions.

As we might have expected, Bush's proposal found $83 million to spend on creating sandbar habitat for nesting birds, restoring side channels and making other environmental improvements in the Missouri River basin.

Environmentalists are continuing to convince government officials that birds and fish on the Missouri River reign supreme, despite U.S. Supreme Court rulings to the contrary. Money for flood control was reduced. If that isn't a 180-degree turnaround in our priorities, what is? Restoring side channels is strictly for wildlife.

The proposed budget includes $4.513 billion for the Corps civil works program. That's $208 million over the fiscal 2005 request but $188.2 million less than Congress finally appropriated. Budget hearings begin in both houses of Congress in March.

Despite the fact that in a recent economic report The Wall Street Journal described waterways as "vital to a broad swath of the economy, carrying everything from jet fuel and coal to salt and the wax for coating milk cartons," the electorate fails to see the big picture.

"The nation's freight-bearing waterway system, plagued by age and breakdowns, is saddling the many companies that rely on the network with a growing number of supply disruptions and added costs," said the Journal.

The article referred to the vulnerability of the aging system to and tight budgets for repairs and improvements. There were no funds requested to continue pre-construction engineering and design of the Upper Mississippi/Illinois Waterway. This major and crucial section of our nation's 12,000 miles of navigable waterways impacts the reliability of water transport clear to the Gulf.

Like defenders trying to shore up the crumbling walls of the Alamo during that fatal, historic battle, the Corps, structural engineers and waterway shippers and carriers are ferreting out weak spots in the Ohio, Upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers so that resources can be allocated wisely.

"We need to know where the greatest risks are and where modest investments can improve system reliability almost immediately," said Barry Palmer, president of Waterways Council Inc. In reality, these leaders are trying to determine where to put the Band-Aids.

If ever there were a modern equivalent of Nero fiddling as Rome burned, this slashing of civil works funds by the administration and Office of Management of the Budget is it. To paraphrase Palmer, "People forget how many basic industries rely on the waterways." We wonder if they ever understood.

Transportation needs of the country are growing. Other freight-transportation systems have seen healthy growth in traffic. It is not that the waterways system could not experience similar growth if funding were sufficient to improve reliability of the system. Unreliability has grown neck and neck with system neglect. When a system is unreliable, contracts cease to come easily.

As we said up front, industry leaders are queuing up to see if they can squeeze some more money out of the budget for waterways. The National Waterways Conference 2005 Budget Summit is scheduled for March 8–9 in Washington, during which time attendees will try to convince congressional delegates of the need for better financing. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee leadership has sent a "dear colleague" letter requesting that its members identify projects in their districts that they wish to be considered for the Water Resource Development Act of 2005.

Good luck!

The Waterways Journal encourages letters to the editor.
Have something on your mind?
Send letters to: jshoulberg@waterwaysjournal.net.
(Please indicate whether or not your letter is intended for publication.)