Grassley said the "loss of barge traffic would deliver the western part of America's great grain belt into the monopolistic hands of the railroads. Grain transportation prices would drastically increase with disastrous results on farm income. Every farmer in Iowa knows that the balance in grain transportation is competition between barges and railroads. This competition keeps both means of transportation honest and helps give farmers a better financial return on the sale of grain."
Grassley was joined at a Capitol Hill news conference by Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri, as well as two Iowa farmers and a Missouri Farm Bureau leader. Grassley and Bond released a letter they delivered to the White House today. Their letter asks the President not to veto the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which contains a provision authored by Bond to ensure that management changes are not made which would jeopardize barge traffic and allow floods in small communities.
"Before any changes are made, the government must carefully consider the viewpoints of everyone impacted by how the river is managed, and discussions about the future of the Missouri River should take place in the public arena," Grassley said. Earlier this month, Grassley urged Iowans to participate in a month-long public comment period on new recommendations for regulating river flow, reservoir storage, new management efforts, and habitat restoration.
Last Thursday, the Senate voted 93 to 1 for the annual spending bill for energy and water projects. President Clinton has threatened a veto because the Senate rejected a Daschle amendment that would have eliminated Bond's provision. The Bond provision was included in four of the last five energy appropriations bills.
"In addition to the need to keep competition in the grain transportation system, the Daschle amendment could result in significant flooding downstream given the heavy rains that are usually experienced in Iowa and other downstream states. Unanticipated downstream storms can make a "controlled release" a deadly flood. Why should the many small communities along the Missouri River face an increased risk for flooding and its devastation? They shouldn't," Grassley said.