Noem Succeeds in Making Additional Resources Available to Lewis & Clark Project in House-Passed Bill

Noem Succeeds in Making Additional Resources Available to Lewis & Clark Project in House-Passed Bill

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Congresswoman Kristi Noem today announced she has successfully led an effort to make additional resources available for rural water projects in the Fiscal Year 2016 Energy and Water appropriations bill without increasing total spending in the bill. The legislation, which passed the House today, would allocate a total of $28.75 million to a rural water project fund that the Lewis and Clark Regional Water System is eligible to draw from. Total funding in the Energy and Water appropriations bill as brought to the floor for debate was $633 million below the president’s funding request.

“It is imperative that the federal government meets the promises it has made to rural areas while still protecting hardworking taxpayers, and this bill helps accomplish that,” said Rep. Noem. “Our local communities have put in more than their share of the funding for Lewis and Clark, but the federal government has not kept its commitment. By not living up to its end of the deal, the federal government is costing taxpayers more money in the long run due to inflation and inaction on projects like Lewis & Clark. The bill passed today includes funding for a rural water account I previously was able to create which could help fund Lewis & Clark at a higher level than the president requested while also not increasing the bill’s overall spending.”

Troy Larson, executive director of the Lewis and Clark Regional Water System said, “It is terribly frustrating that the administration refuses to make rural water construction a priority in its annual budget. Thankfully the House today added another $28.75 million to the Bureau of Reclamation’s Rural Water Program, bringing the proposed total for the FY16 Budget to $47.3 million and matching last year’s total. We still have a long way to go to get overall funding for rural water construction to where it needs to be, but this is a huge improvement over the President’s proposal. We cannot thank Congresswoman Noem and the rest of the tri-state congressional delegation enough for once again going to bat for this critically needed water project. We greatly appreciate the strong support and leadership that she and the rest of the delegation continue to provide.”

The Fiscal Year 2016 Energy and Water appropriations bill specifically allocates $2.774 million in support of the Lewis and Clark project. Additionally, Rep. Noem led an effort with eight other Members to increase overall rural water funding, making an additional $28.75 million available to projects like Lewis and Clark. This brings overall funding for rural water projects to a level equal to what they received last year.

The rural water projects fund was originally created in 2013 as the result of an amendment offered by Rep. Noem to the FY2014 Energy and Water appropriations bill. Lewis and Clark received $5.2 million from that account in addition to the funding specifically allocated to the project in the bill. Rep Noem again offered an amendment in 2014 to the FY2015 Energy and Water appropriations bill, which resulted in an additional $31 million for rural water. Lewis and Clark received $6.6 million from that account in addition to the funding they were originally allocated for the project.
###

6 thoughts on “Noem Succeeds in Making Additional Resources Available to Lewis & Clark Project in House-Passed Bill”

    1. Personally, I believe if the communities served by this just paid for it themselves and forgot about the federal government, the project would probably be done by now and will have cost less. However I do not have a problem with a conservative passing bills to get done something that was agreed to by the federal government. This is a project that has been going on a lot longer than Noem has been in Congress. When this was first agreed to, the feds and the communities involved came to an agreement. This bill is nothing more than putting that agreement into motion. You need to try again.

    1. You make a deal with an entity. You and the entity agree that if you pay a certain amount for a project the entity will pay the rest. In good faith you go ahead and pay the portion you agreed to. Then the entity reneges on the project. Would you not agree that the entity is in breach of a contract? All I see here is people who are affected by this project are trying to get the feds to do what it promised. Whether you believe this to be welfare or not, the feds made a deal and should stick with it. As I said before, the communities would be way ahead if they just got the bonding and did it on their own. That is not the way it came about so the feds should honor their agreement.

      1. South Dakota gets more back from the Feds than they put in so its welfare. If you really want something done and it’s so important do it yourself

        1. Yep! South Dakota needs to lead by example for once in a positive way by paying it’s own way. Quit the bringin home the pork, end subsidies and welfare. Otherwise it’s all hypocrisy.

Comments are closed.