Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 5055

Spending $37 Billion on Federal Energy and Water Programs for FY2017

Argument in favor

This bill strikes an appropriate balance in its funding priorities, and will improve the national security while also making infrastructure investments that benefit the economy.

CShaffer's Opinion
···
05/24/2016
We need to start investing more money in our infrastructure and security as well as cut funding to nation and organizations that hate us. It's time to focus the taxes paid by the people on budget plans that will benefit the people of the United States.
Like (18)
Follow
Share
Jake's Opinion
···
05/25/2016
The lead crisis is far more massive of an issue then people are aware of and is worth pulling funds from renewable energy funds to pay for it. Currently 2000 water systems across all 50 states have lead found in there system which, in turn, affect 6 MILLION American!
Like (5)
Follow
Share
GrumpyMSgt's Opinion
···
05/25/2016
Yes, but I would like to see some emphasis placed on mining coal.
Like (4)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

This legislation cuts too deeply into renewable energy programs while increasing funding for fossil fuel research. That’s simply unacceptable.

Tastybaldeagle's Opinion
···
05/24/2016
Most of this money is going toward weapon grade plutonium and fossil fuels. It would cut the already abysmal funding state for renewable energy.
Like (32)
Follow
Share
William's Opinion
···
05/24/2016
This bill is $1 billion short of the president's request for renewable energy. Less fossil fuel research and more investment towards renewables is imperative for sustaining civil society in the decades to come.
Like (26)
Follow
Share
Todd's Opinion
···
05/24/2016
Fossil fuels are not the future. In order to achieve type one society status, we must prioritize renewable sources of energy, especially sun power.
Like (15)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H.R. 5055?

This bill would authorize $37.4 billion in appropriations to be spent on various federal energy and water programs in fiscal year 2017, which is $259 million more than the prior year and $168 million more than the president’s budget called for. Funding would go toward nuclear weapons programs, protecting critical national and regional waterways, and the Army Corps of Engineers.


NUCLEAR SECURITY

The Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) nuclear weapons security programs would receive $12.9 billion in funding, an increase of $327 million from the previous year, thus ensuring that the U.S. nuclear stockpile is secure and the military is ready to deter threats. Specifically, this would include:

  • $9.3 billion for weapons activities, $438 million more than 2016;

  • $1.4 billion for naval nuclear reactors, $45 million more than 2016;

  • $1.8 billion for defense nuclear nonproliferation, $118 million less than the previous year. Included in this total is $340 million to fulfill an international commitment to operate a Mixed Oxide (MOX) Fuel Fabrication Facility to dispose of surplus plutonium.

Additionally, $150 million would go to the Nuclear Waste Disposal program and another $20 million to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to operate and oversee the Yucca Mountain nuclear repository. Funding for non-Yucca nuclear waste activities would be denied.


ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

$6.1 billion in funding would go to the Army Corps of Engineers, which would be $100 million more than the previous year and $1.5 billion more than the president’s budget requested. Spending would be focused on activities that “will have an immediate impact on public safety, job creation, and economic growth” such as making ports and waterways more functional.


ENERGY PROGRAMS

DOE energy programs would receive $11.08 billion in funding, which is $56 million more than the previous year but $1.3 billion below the president’s budget request. $1.8 billion of that total would go to energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, which is $248 million less than last year and just over $1 billion less than the president’s request.

Research and development into coal, natural gas, oil, and other fossil energy technologies would receive $645 million in funding, which is $13 million more than the previous year. Nuclear energy research, development, and demonstration activities would get $25 million more than in 2016, to reach a total funding level of $1.01 billion.


CLEAN WATER ACT

There are several provisions in this bill related to the Clean Water Act (CWA), including one preventing changes to federal jurisdiction under the law. Any changes to the definitions of “fill material” or “discharge of fill material” under the CWA would be prohibited.

Impact

Americans who benefit from energy, water, or infrastructure authorized by this bill; nuclear security programs; the Army Corps of Engineers; and the DOE.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 5055

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) introduced this bill, citing its importance not only in terms of national security, but also to the economy through investments in infrastructure and energy research:

“This is a responsible bill that supports U.S. national security, safety, and economic competitiveness – balancing these critical priorities while maintaining tight budget caps. It prioritizes the maintenance and safety of our nuclear weapons, and makes strategic investments in infrastructure projects and energy research that will help grow our economy.”

The House Appropriations Committee passed this bill on a voice vote.



Media:

Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: Flickr user peretzp)

AKA

Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2017

Official Title

Making appropriations for energy and water development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2017, and for other purposes.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house Rejected May 26th, 2016
    Roll Call Vote 112 Yea / 305 Nay
      house Committees
      Committee on Appropriations
    IntroducedApril 26th, 2016

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    We need to start investing more money in our infrastructure and security as well as cut funding to nation and organizations that hate us. It's time to focus the taxes paid by the people on budget plans that will benefit the people of the United States.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    Most of this money is going toward weapon grade plutonium and fossil fuels. It would cut the already abysmal funding state for renewable energy.
    Like (32)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is $1 billion short of the president's request for renewable energy. Less fossil fuel research and more investment towards renewables is imperative for sustaining civil society in the decades to come.
    Like (26)
    Follow
    Share
    Fossil fuels are not the future. In order to achieve type one society status, we must prioritize renewable sources of energy, especially sun power.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Why is it that renewable energy ALWAYS takes a back seat to petroleum interests who are killing the planet & have been doing so knowingly since the 1970's? Could it be that you, who have responsibility, are complete cowards and fools? YOU are collectively responsible for Trump & the demise of this country in whose flag you are always wrapped & who guard every bad argument by holding the Constitution to your traitorous manly chests!
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    This is backwards. We need to increase funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy (I work in the energy industry), and decrease funding for fossils fuels, so we can transition from fossils to renewable.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    The lead crisis is far more massive of an issue then people are aware of and is worth pulling funds from renewable energy funds to pay for it. Currently 2000 water systems across all 50 states have lead found in there system which, in turn, affect 6 MILLION American!
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    The additional funding for fossil fuels is concerning because it is at the cost of renewable funding. Additionally, the revisions the clean water act are protections to the coal industry's poor record of effectively mitigating their negative impact on the environment after they mine out an area
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Fund solar
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, but I would like to see some emphasis placed on mining coal.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Absolutely not! Decrease funding for clean energy and increase funding for burning coal and oil? What the hell is wrong with people? Fossil fuels are a finite resource that is running out. Whether you accept the reality of climate change or not, you cannot honestly believe that breathing coal smoke is good for you!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    This seems like a lot of money and I'm not sure that I am comfortable that any of these departments will be fiscally responsible stewards of tax payer dollars; but it has to be funded. In regards to the renewable energy funding that opponents of the bill are complaining about... I say this to them... Put a sock in it! We have already spent billions on failed renewable energy pet projects. The govt needs to be fiscally responsible and focus on energy resources we know and create jobs.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Fossil fuels are going to be the mainstay of this countries energy backbone for a long time till renewable energy technics becomes more efficient, affordable, and dependable. As new technologies become available and meet the above requirements, fossil fuels will be fazed out over a period of time. Crying about it, and demanding action isn't going to change that. If you feel that strong about fossil fuels, then sell your car and buy a horse, get rid of your computers and iPhones. You can't complain about the "problem" and still be a part of supporting it.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Wow what a liberal slant on the description of the nay on this one. If you want this to be a truly great app try to be non-partisan. To say "that's not acceptable" is really not appropriate for Countable to say. Just provide the facts not your opinion. #thoughtpolice #1984
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Just more military spending and domestic infrastructure negligence.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    We need more spending on nuclear weapons research being that we are behind in the world. Especially behind the once again started Cold War threat that is Russia.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes, energy and water are critical... yet another painfully deceptive title for this bill. We already spend much more on weaponry ever justifiably should, given the environmental education problems this country is facing.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Increase funding for renewable energy resources, not for nonrenewables!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    In favor of protecting waterways and improving our more efficient energy resources but I see no reason for such an increase in spending for our WMD development. We're fighting different kinds of enemies today that's like building a bigger gun to fight off mosquitos.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    More money on fossil fuels and weaponry? Why not reallocate that money instead? We already spend more money on defense than anyone else.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE