[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E542-E543]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

FLORIDA EVERGLADES BRIDGE

______

HON. JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR.

of tennessee

in the house of representatives

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Mr. DUNCAN. Madam Speaker, in yesterday's Washington Times is an
article about a very controversial bridge project through the Florida
Everglades.
This project has been strongly opposed by the Miccosukee Tribe
through whose land this bridge would be built.
A federal judge has blasted this projected bridge in a scathing
opinion, but our Omnibus bill ordered that it be constructed anyway.
The estimated cost is $225 million, but because almost all federal
projects are given lowball estimates on the front end, it would
probably end up costing much, much more. I have discussed this project
with my friend, Representative Mario Diaz-Balart in whose district this
bridge project is located.
He told me he has discussed this bridge with the Army Corps of
Engineers and all of the interested parties.
He believes that, while a bridge may have to be built at some point,
that other, cheaper alternatives should be considered first.
I agree with Representative Balart, for whom I have the greatest
respect.
I would like to call to the attention of my colleagues and other
readers of the Record the following article about this project from the
Washington Times.

[[Page E543]]

[From the Washington Times]

`Bridge to Nowhere' OK'd for Everglades

(By Stephen Dinan)

A provision buried inside Congress' giant spending bill
would overturn a federal court order, discard part of
environmental law and reject an Indian tribe's plea, forcing
the government to build a bridge in Everglades National Park
that a federal judge declared ``a complete waste of taxpayer
dollars.''
The project is being opposed by the Miccosukee tribe, and
U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro called it an
``environmental bridge to nowhere.'' She ordered the
government in November to comply with federal environmental
laws, which would further delay the long-controversial
project.
But lawmakers inserted a provision in the 1,123-page
omnibus spending bill that is pending in the Senate. It
waives those laws and in sweeping language orders the Army
Corps of Engineers to begin building the bridge ``immediately
and without further delay.''
Those pushing for the bridge, which would elevate the
Tamiami Trail roadway to allow water to flow freely into the
Everglades, say Congress' urgency is justified.
``The project has been studied and delayed over and over
again for 20 years. Meantime, one of the world's great
treasures continues to die,'' said Dan McLaughlin, a
spokesman for Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat. ``The
National Academy of Sciences, in a report to Congress, says
the bridge is needed to allow water north of the road to flow
south into the Everglades. Senator Nelson supports it. It's
absolutely essential to restoring the `Glades. No bridge--no
water flow. No water--no Everglades.''
But the Miccosukee, who went to court last year to stop the
bridge, are crying foul, saying it's hypocritical of Congress
to ignore its own environmental laws.
The tribe also said that overturning a court order smacks
of the broken treaties and poor treatment Indians suffered in
years past.
``You tell the tribe to follow the law, but when the tribe
follows the law and wins, you throw them out of court. It's
really immoral and unconscionable,'' said Dexter Lehtinen, an
attorney for the tribe. His wife is Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen,
a Florida Republican who Mr. Lehtinen said recuses herself
from these matters.
The $212 million bridge is part of a complex and
contentious decades-old plan to try to restore the free flow
of water through the Everglades, the swamp that covers much
of southern Florida and is considered critical to the state's
ecosystem. Decades of development and road-building have
ruined the usual water flows.
Plans to restore water flow have changed repeatedly, and
parts have been caught up in litigation, including the
proposal to build a one-mile-long bridge along the northern
park boundary at the Tamiami Trail, or U.S. Highway 41, which
backers say would help the free flow.
The Miccosukee trace their time in the Everglades back to
the 1700s when they moved to avoid encroaching upon European
settlers farther north, in what is now Georgia, Alabama and
northern Florida. They gained U.S. government recognition in
1962 and have both official reservation land and other land
in perpetual lease.
Rather than the bridge, the tribe wants the government to
instead clean out culverts and build swells that the
Miccosukee say better and more cheaply restore water flow.
``The judge found that the likelihood is that people in
Miami-Dade County are going to be flooded, there's not going
to be any benefit to Everglades National Park, and Miccosukee
land is going to be further damaged,'' said Terry Rice, owner
of an environmental services company and a former head of the
Army Corps of Engineers district that includes the
Everglades, who served as a witness for the tribe in court.
``Why do you say you have to build a project and you're not
going to abide by any laws unless you can't abide by the
laws?'' Mr. Rice said.
The judge apparently agreed.
In issuing her preliminary injunction against the bridge,
she said it won't begin to help water flow until the corps
takes other steps, which are still in the planning stages.
Given that, the judge said, rushing to build the project
amounts to ``no more than construction of an `environmental
bridge to nowhere' that accomplishes (and harms) nothing but
which would be a complete waste of taxpayer dollars.''
Backers acknowledged that tacking this sort of provision
onto a spending bill was unusual, but said the bridge has
widespread support, and only the tribe--and now the federal
judge--objected.
Still, it could not be learned Monday who approved the
insertion of the provision that forces the bridge to be built
into the $410 billion spending bill making its way through
Congress.
The Miccosukee, in an ad last week, blamed House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for the
measure. The tribe called it ``a lamentable blast from the
past in American history.''
But both leaders' offices said they weren't responsible.
``We had nothing to do with this,'' said Jim Manley, a
spokesman for Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat.
``This language was included at the request of the Bush
administration and has bipartisan support. Neither the
speaker nor her office played a role in its inclusion,'' said
Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Mrs. Pelosi, California
Democrat.
The Army Corps of Engineers also said it wasn't the source.
``To our knowledge the corps did not promote or draft this
language,'' said spokeswoman Lt. Col Elizabeth Robbins.
The Interior Department did not return messages for
comment.
Spokesmen for Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat,
and Rep. Norm Dicks, Washington Democrat, the chairmen of the
Senate and House subcommittees that wrote the parts of the
bill funding the Interior Department, didn't have a comment
Monday night.
A spokeswoman said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, a Florida
Republican whose district could be affected, was unavailable,
while a spokeswoman for Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida
Republican, said the senator did not request the provision,
but she said she couldn't say whether he supported it.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Florida Democrat whose
district is also affected, does support moving forward, said
spokesman Jonathan Beeton.
``The congresswoman supports this project because it is the
essential next step in Everglades restoration,'' Mr. Beeton
said. ``This view is supported by the National Academy of
Sciences. At the same time, she understands the concerns and
the deep commitment of the Miccosukee Tribe to the
restoration of the Everglades.''
Several Democrats pointed to the Bush administration's
support for the provision. But that came in his fiscal 2009
budget, submitted nine months before the judge ruled that the
environmental laws hadn't been followed.

____________________