What: All Issues : Making Government Work for Everyone, Not Just the Rich or Powerful : Infrastructure Funding : (H.R. 1145) On the Shadegg of Arizona amendment, which would have required the identification of state and local water research and development programs that duplicate the effort of federal programs. (2009 house Roll Call 203)
 Who: All Members
[POW!]
 

To find out how your Members of Congress voted on this bill, use the form on the right.

(H.R. 1145) On the Shadegg of Arizona amendment, which would have required the identification of state and local water research and development programs that duplicate the effort of federal programs.
house Roll Call 203     Apr 23, 2009
Progressive Position:
Nay
Progressive Result:
Win

H.R. 1145, the National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 2009, was designed to promote the coordination of various federal research, development, and management efforts in dealing with national water needs. The Act had bipartisan support.  This was a vote on an amendment offered by Rep Shadegg (R-AZ) that would have required those federal departments or agencies implementing the Act to identify federal water-related research and development technological innovative activities that are duplicated by more than one Federal agency or program, or by a federal agency and a state or local government or Indian tribe. It would also have required any federal department or agency finding duplication to make recommendations to the President as to how to avoid such duplication.

Rep. Shadegg (R-AZ), first noted that the purpose of the Act is to coordinate federal water programs to ensure they are conducted in an “`efficient and cost-efficient manner.’'' He then said that there are currently over 20 federal agencies carrying out research and development on water programs, as well as state, county and local agencies engaging in the same kind of work. Shadegg went on to claim that the provisions of the Act do not necessarily avoid duplication of efforts. He said his amendment “is intended to look at the issue of efforts at the federal level which duplicate each other and to at least make a recommendation that they be consolidated for reasons of efficiency, and to do the same with regard to State, local or tribal efforts.”

Rep. Gordon (D-TN), who was leading the support for the Water Research and Development Initiative Act, opposed the amendment. He said it “would require the administration to determine what research, development and technology innovation programs exist in 50 states, over 87,000 local government entities, and more than 500 federally recognized tribes … (and) compiling this information would be an enormous and expensive undertaking.”  Gordon added that the amendment has no provision for paying these costs. He also argued that, even if an identified duplicative state or local program was very small, the amendment “would preempt a Federal effort that could be much more significant and worthwhile.”   

The amendment was defeated on a vote of 160-271. One hundred and fifty-four Republicans and six Democrats voted “aye”. Two hundred and fifty-two Democrats and nineteen republicans voted “nay”. As a result, language was not added to the Water Research and Development Initiative requiring the identification of state and local water research and development programs that duplicate the effort of federal programs.

Issue Areas:

Find your Member of
Congress' votes

Select by Name