Video archive of the US Congress

Senate Proceeding on Jul 29th, 2009 :: 6:30:55 to 6:36:10
Total video length: 11 hours 18 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:211 Duration: 0:05:15 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Claire McCaskill

6:30:51 to 6:31:11( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: bidding on earmarks, that is not the amendment. mrs. mccaskill: my discussion is about the noncompetitive earmarks. and i think whatever amendment gets us to more competition, i'm for it. and i think that there are way too many. i couldn't be a bigger fan of the senator from north dakota and what he's done on contracting as it relates to the war in iraq.

Claire McCaskill

6:30:55 to 6:36:10( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Claire McCaskill

Claire McCaskill

6:31:12 to 6:31:32( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: i followed those hearings before i came to the senate. i continue to follow them. he has been a groundbreaker in the area of wanting competition. if you look at the billions of dollars that were wasted in the iraq war over noncompete contracts, if you look at the atrocities that were committed in the name of noncompetition that the senator from north

Claire McCaskill

6:31:33 to 6:31:54( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: carolina has exposed, he has been terrific on that. and we just have a disagreement about whether or notarmarks -- some of us disagre about whether or not earmarks should be competed. i know that -- i generally, alth

Claire McCaskill

6:31:55 to 6:32:15( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: bill that removes all earmarks, i generally don't go in and pick out an earmark to complain about. and i generally don't vote for amendments that do. because in many ways i think the process of just picking on one amendment here or one earmark here, one earmark there, one earmark there can be as arbitrary as the process of earmarking sometimes appears to

Claire McCaskill

6:32:16 to 6:32:36( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: be. so i generally don't do that. but in this instance there's an earmark in the bill that i know a lot about. the senator whose -- from north dakota is offering, has done this becau much in having another study on the missouri river.

Claire McCaskill

6:32:37 to 6:32:57( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: and we've been fighting over water in this country for as long as this country's been around. water's pretty important. water is very important in missouri. the navigation of the missouri river is incredibly important to our farmers. it's important to our utility companies. in fact, there was a very large study undertaken on the missouri

Claire McCaskill

6:32:58 to 6:33:19( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: river, and it was completed in 2004. it cost the taxpayers $35 million. it took 15 years to complete. and there was all kinds of lawsuits over it between the various states up and down the river. there were a couple of things that came out of that study. one of them was there was an

Claire McCaskill

6:33:20 to 6:33:42( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: agreement that began the missouri river recovery and it is a committee that includes stakeholders from all along the river that meets several times a year to help develop a long-term management plan for the river. this prosz has just recently begun. it hasn't even had time to work. and i really feel strongly that

Claire McCaskill

6:33:43 to 6:34:06( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: repeating another study when there is nothing that has dramatically changed since we spent the $35 million on the one that got done in 2004, and now we're going to begin another $25 million study by the same group, looking at the same issues. and that, to me, is wasteful. i think that the fact that the

Claire McCaskill

6:34:07 to 6:34:28( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: senator from north dakota did participate aggressively in the long-term management proposal on the mmric, the missouri river recovery and implementation committee, i would hope we give it time to work before we embarked on another policy. i know there was a g.a.o. study that talked about navigation, and i know that that study

Claire McCaskill

6:34:29 to 6:34:50( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: showed that there are less goods being shipped on the missouri river. but that g.a.o. study didn't take into account a couple of things. one thing it didn't take into account is the navigation season has been severely limited by the corps, and that drives away the shippers. it also did not include -- this g.a.o. study did not include --

Claire McCaskill

6:34:51 to 6:35:11( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: and this is important -- it did not include the value of the goods shipped, the jobs associated with those shipments or the impact on utilities. we have in fact four power plants located ang the river that need the water in the missouri river to cool their plants.

Claire McCaskill

6:35:12 to 6:35:32( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: i just think that this study is not going to end the fight over the river. i cannot fathom what a $35 million study failed to accomplish that a new $25 million study is now going to accomplish. i think this is a great example

Claire McCaskill

6:35:33 to 6:35:54( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: of studies to try to impact policies so you just keep having continuous studies. the amendment that i have offere would remove the money for this study because i do think it is wasteful duication. i do believe very strongly that in fact we should not be embarking on another one of these studies.

Claire McCaskill

6:35:55 to 6:36:12( Edit History Discussion )

Claire McCaskill: it's wasteful and it's duplicative, and i will want to continue to work with the senator from north dakota. obviously we don't see eye to eye on who should get all the water in the missouri river. we probably never will. i look forward to working with him. hopefully as we move forward

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid