March 7, 1975
Page 5726
SENATE RESOLUTION 102 – SUBMISSION OF A RESOLUTION DISAPPROVING PROPOSED DEFERRAL OF BUDGET AUTHORITY OF NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION FUNDS
(Referred to the Committee on Commerce.)
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, my colleague (Senator HATHAWAY) and I are today submitting a resolution to disapprove the President's deferral of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration funds. This deferral message, containing several items, adversely affects State programs across the country which are involved in the conservation and management of our marine resources.
Several problems presently confront the U.S. fishing industry. Aside from the difficulties involved in our general economic situation, the U.S. fishing industry must compete with heavily subsidized foreign fleets, which fish near – or even within – the present 12-mile economic zones. Faced with this situation, our fleets have found themselves at a competitive disadvantage, and offshore U.S. fishing stocks have been severely depleted. Now is not the time to cut back
on our fisheries management programs; world food shortages and depletion of our fish stocks compel a renewed commitment to these programs.
The fishing industry is, of course, of great importance in the economy of the State of Maine. Two of the program cuts which are of particular interest are the deferral of fisheries research and development funds and anadromous conservation funds and the deferral of the sea grant program funds.
The amount deferred in research and development and conservation is only $600,000. But coming halfway through the fiscal year, this deferral has the impact of a 20 percent reduction in funds for my home State of Maine and other beneficiaries of the program. In Maine this means the loss of two full-time position, 3 summer research positions, as well as reductions in travel, equipment and maintenance, and laboratory supply funds. So this apparently small reduction is deceptive; it will result in irreversible cutbacks in personnel and termination of ongoing research and development projects.
In addition to this, the administration would reduce the sea grant programs this year by more than a million dollars. In Maine these funds are primarily used to carry out aquaculture programs – programs of fish farming – innovations which show such promise of developing new regional industries and revitalizing various segments of our fisheries. At a time in which the position of the U.S. fishing industry has remained stable or declines, while domestic consumption of fish has increased dramatically over the past several years, we should be increasing our support of such management and conservation programs. At a minimum we must require that they be funded at the levels approved by Congress.
Mr. HATHAWAY. Mr. President, I take the floor today to submit, along with the senior Senator from Maine (Mr. MUSKIE) a resolution to disapprove the President's deferral of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration funds. This action by the President would defer allocation of authorized and appropriated funds to the many States which have ongoing projects to assist the fisheries industries. Spending would be curtailed by $6.8 million under this original deferral message.
The President is right in his thinking that some funds already appropriated by Congress should be deferred until the state of the economy regains its healthy hue. But I submit that he is terribly wrong in his action against the expenditure of NOAA's moneys.
A short time ago, I chaired hearings in my State on the subject of the fisheries industry in an effort to assess what benefits were being accorded our fisheries industries as small businesses. During those hearings the common theme expressed by our citizens who earn their living from the water was the glaring lack of attention and concern by the Federal Government for them.
There are agencies to deal with small businesses, and funds to assist many segments of our small business community. But there is very little in the way of Federal assistance that finds its way to our marine industries.
The funds the President would ask us to cut are minute when compared to the national budget. But despite their nominal size, those dollars advance and assist programs which are vital to our knowledge of the sea. Without the knowledge these programs can provide, we lose the ability to fully harvest our marine resources. In Maine, this cutback is less severe in terms of dollars than in other coastal States. That fact, however, does not mitigate the impact this will have on Maine fisheries.
NOAA has contributed much toward our ability to reap the benefits of the sea. We are now involved in our State with the Apollo-Soyuz test project, whereby Soviet and American astronauts and cosmonauts will extensively photograph our coast so that we may better understand the causes of the red tide. We already know all too well the terrible effects of this natural phenomenon. Cutting back funds for related ocean research, or any research which will better equip us to feed ourselves, does not make much sense to me.
I shall support the President in any effort to eradicate nonproductive spending of our tax dollars. But to curb spending in areas which affect our ability to produce or harvest food is simply not a very intelligent way to save money. I cannot support his proposal to defer these funds.
The resolution reads as follows:
S. Res. 102
Resolved, That the Senate disapproves the proposed deferral of budget authority (D75-94) for the Department of Commerce, an appropriation for operation, research and facilities for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, set forth in the special message transmitted by the President to Congress on November 26, 1974, under section 1013 of the Impoundment Control Act of 1974.