OCR Text |
Show 475 Accordingly, an MVA bill was reintroduced the following year, and since it embraced matters within the jurisdiction of several separate Congressional Committees, the Senate ordered its Committees on Irrigation and Reclamation, on Agriculture and Forestry, and on Commerce, each to report on those fea- tures of the bill falling within its jurisdiction.378 The first two of these Committees recommended against adoption of the proposal, contending that approval of the "Pick-Sloan" plan had made it unnecessary, and that existing agencies were doing a satisfactory job.379 The Committee on Agriculture and For- estry merely recommended postponing further hearings indefi- nitely.380 Subsequent MVA proposals have been introduced but no further action has been taken.381 Commission has also been stricken out. So that as the bill now stands, as I understand, there is nothing in it which would be prejudicial, or inimical, let me say, to the creation of a Missouri Valley Authority. As I under- stand, by the passage of the bill we would take the first step which the President recommended. The second step would be the creation of the Missouri Valley Authority. As I stated previously, I favor a Missouri Valley Authority." Id. p. 8627. The stricken language referred to by Senator Hill read, "It is the purpose of this act to establish a definite policy of making use of existing Federal agencies for the construction, operation, and maintenance of all public im- provements in connection with navigation, flood control, and allied activi- ties ; to insure coordinated operation of all Federal projects therein for the improvement of navigation and alleviation of flood conditions; to provide for realization of other benefits to be derived from such projects; to facili- tate preparations and planning for post-war construction by the Federal Government in the interest of employment; and to secure efficient executive management under the direction and supervision of the permanent execu- tive agencies already established by Act of Congress." Id. p. 8243. 878 S. 555 and Sen. Res. 97, both 79th Cong., 1st sess. (1945). 8TO Sen. Rep. No. 246, 79th Cong., 1st sess., p. 1 (1945) ; Sen. Rep. No. 639, Part 1, 79th Cong., 1st sess., p. 1 (1945). The Commerce Committee also said: "Flood control is not a Missouri regional problem, any more than it is a local problem. Flood control is a Mississippi Basin-wide problem in which the Missouri River is only one of the tributaries. The flood-control prob- lem of the Mississippi Basin can be solved only by Federal control by one agency, with authority over the entire Mississippi Basin. The agency best qualified for this task by experience and training is the United States Army Engineers." Sen. Rep. No. 246, p. 2. 880 Sen. Rep. No. 889, 79th Cong., 2d sess. (1946). 881 S. 1156, 80th Cong., 1st sess. (1947) ; S. 1160 and H. R. 3522, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949). See also H. R. 894, 81st Cong., 1st sess. (1949) (Rankin Bill for Conservation Authorities). |