HOUSE BILL: The Storm Surge, Coastal Flooding... (At Final Vote)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Atlasian People's House of Representatives
Pending
[/quote]

Sponsor: Leinad for the President
House Designation: HB 1112

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor has 24 hours to commence advocacy for this bill.


Other members have an additional 48 hours to post their initial comments and questions.

And yes, I am assembling a list based of those who have violated the latter on the first few bills and the warning PMs will be incoming shortly.

[Pessimistic Antineutrino]

800 bil makes me sweat a little but I think it's necessary. We cannot let ourselves be caught unprepared when the worst comes.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Good Midday to you House of Representatives! I put together this bill as part of my infrastructure promise (if you call this infrastructure).  Many of you do not know this but I have a special place in my heart for things related to meteorology, I have been tracking weather patterns and events (along with natural disasters such as tsunamis and earthquakes) since I was in Kindergarten and so I have a special passion for this type of thing. The price tag can certainly be adjusted, but I come prepared with much research on why these types of research and implementation are needed. I also believe that Natural Disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis are the single greatest threat to our national security.

I will start with some facts on storm surge and why research and implementation could help reduce or in some cases eliminate the threat of storm surge:

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/surge/ Here we have a basic National Hurricane Center facts page on storm surge flooding along the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic coastlines, it shows the vulnerability of some areas (you can see graphics on many of the main storm surge producers we have experienced over the years). One of the main things you should pay attention to however is the continental vs shelf comparison. One way we can research and implement this are creating artificial height changes eg. creating barrier islands to help slow the momentum of said waves or creating seawalls (such as they have on Galveston Island, Texas) or levees (such as what they have in New Orleans, LA if built right). The main research cost is A. studying the environmental impacts these methods would have as the Oceans, particularly the Gulf of Mexico, have very fragile marine environments which the Southern economy is highly dependent on in some cases, B. proper implementation, you wouldn't want cases like bad or failing levees like what we saw in New Orleans, LA during Hurricane Katrina. and C. Ensuring that these will truly stop hurricanes storm surge flooding through computer models and the like.

Now for tsunami based flooding:

http://www.livescience.com/48638-offshore-islands-boost-tsunami-flooding.html The first thing I must note is that on the Pacific Ocean side of things, and this is entirely based on Fremont so I would be curious to see what Prime Minister Truman has to say on this issue, but small islands will not work on the Fremont side as studies show they actually amplify tsunami waves (but stop storm surge waves).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386978/The-Japanese-mayor-laughed-building-huge-sea-wall--village-left-untouched-tsunami.html (Please excuse the source, the information is backed with citations) Next I want to take a look at what we see in Japan, seawalls and floodgates work well against Tsunamis and seem to be the only way to really stop them. This is also the case in Crescent City, CA where a seawall is in place that helped stop the 2011 Japan Earthquake and Tsunami's impacts on the West Coast in that particular city, where the landscape helps to enhances tsunami waves.

Finally, on the tsunami front I'd like to explain why I am so concerned about the threat of a Pacific Tsunami. This does not apply as much to California (at least the southern part) as it does to Oregon and Washington. https://pnsn.org/outreach/earthquakesources/csz In the Pacific Northwest exists an area called the "Cascadia Subduction Zone", much hype has been made over the San Andreas Fault, but the Cascadia Subduction Zone is far more dangerous as it is capable of producing earthquakes of up to or over 9.0 in magnitude on the Richter Scale. This would create very large tsunami waves along the Pacific Coastline, that if unchecked would devastate coastal communities and destroy the economy of Fremont for a long time to come. If there are any leftover funds, I would propose looking into implementing an earthquake alert system (as they do in Japan and Chile) which gives residents near an Earthquake's epicenter as much as 1 minute's warning as to when a large earthquake is about to occur.

I have much more on these subjects if anyone has any more questions. Thanks for your consideration!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I can certainly vouch for the necessity of this project from recent, rather personal bad experience in this area. I can understand if there are concerns regarding the cost, but it is critical that make this investment in this area of infrastructure, for it is just as important as roads and other areas. The staggering cost of damage from river flooding and other post storm impacts on water ways, leads to severe economic disruption and a devastating impact on the people of the effected area.

[OneJ]

I don't have anything significant against this bill, so I'm inclined to vote in support of it.

[Clyde1998]

This is certainly a necessary bill and I thank the President for bringing it forward. While the maximum reserve for this is a lot of money, it's something that will be required. It will help protect our citizens from natural disasters, while ensuring that money is always available to assist people who have been affected by them. Protecting against natural disasters will severely reduce our costs in the future, not just in monetary terms, but in human terms too.

[Leinad]

Good idea (duh, I sponsored the damn thing ) but one question: where did the numbers come from? Ballpark figures, or are they realistic estimates? (and I do realize the $800 billion is "up to")

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Minimum Debate Time Analysis:

House Sponsor (Leinad) Posted in first 24 hours: No

Other Members:
Peebs:  no
NC Yankee: yes
Simossad: No
OneJ: 13 hrs late
Pessimistic: Yes
Clyde1998: 15 hrs late
Santander: No
Dereich: No

[Terry the Fat Shark]

ballpark estimates

[Clyde1998]

Clyde1998: 15 hrs late

[Clyde1998]

I'm, personally, happy with the $800bn fund. I feel that this wouldn't be provided straight away, so there's no need to reduce spending elsewhere - should we not wish to do so - to pass this bill and considering that Hurricane Katrina caused $108bn worth of damage (as an example), it's always good to money reserved for natural disasters while having additional money held back in case of multiple major disasters in a short space of time.

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Eh, at least Leinad didn't come in in time, either.

I have no remarks of my own - this looks pretty good.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Clyde1998: 15 hrs late

Well I have to do something to get you people talking. Its a strict standard, yes. But it is based on the minimum debate time, so it isn't pulled randomly out of my ass. Surely, in 72 hours one can find the time to post at least what Peebs did and sooner than a week after the bill hit the floor.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I'm, personally, happy with the $800bn fund. I feel that this wouldn't be provided straight away, so there's no need to reduce spending elsewhere - should we not wish to do so - to pass this bill and considering that Hurricane Katrina caused $108bn worth of damage (as an example), it's always good to money reserved for natural disasters while having additional money held back in case of multiple major disasters in a short space of time.

Actually that is not how the bill is written.

A lot of that money would be spent dredging rivers, replacing dams and restoring coastal barriers to hurricanes.

A lot of this is in serious need of immediate help. We have earthen dams in NC that are a mega disaster waiting to happen and there was one in Moore county that came really close to collapsing during Matthew. Several others were breached or severely weakened as a result.

[Leinad]

Eh, at least Leinad didn't come in in time, either.

On a technicality, since it's not really my bill, but whatever

[Clyde1998]

I'm, personally, happy with the $800bn fund. I feel that this wouldn't be provided straight away, so there's no need to reduce spending elsewhere - should we not wish to do so - to pass this bill and considering that Hurricane Katrina caused $108bn worth of damage (as an example), it's always good to money reserved for natural disasters while having additional money held back in case of multiple major disasters in a short space of time.

Actually that is not how the bill is written.

A lot of that money would be spent dredging rivers, replacing dams and restoring coastal barriers to hurricanes.

A lot of this is in serious need of immediate help. We have earthen dams in NC that are a mega disaster waiting to happen and there was one in Moore county that came really close to collapsing during Matthew. Several others were breached or severely weakened as a result.

That works even better then.

Protecting areas against damage would reduce the cost of the the impact of any disaster and, in a lot of cases, would prevent the disaster from happening.

Either way, I'm happy with the 'up to' $800bn fund.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So any further matters for discussion or can this be moved along?

[President of the great nation of 🏳️‍⚧️]

Eh, at least Leinad didn't come in in time, either.

On a technicality, since it's not really my bill, but whatever

#NotMyBill

But more seriously, you sponsored it, so let me feel better about myself, okay?

[CMB222]

I like the overall idea of this bill but that is a lot of money. I don't know exact figures but I'm inclined to guess that we don't have $800 billion just lying around. If the US federal government were to implement a bill like this, it would take up about 20% of all spending. Again, the idea is a good one but can we afford the price tag?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I like the overall idea of this bill but that is a lot of money. I don't know exact figures but I'm inclined to guess that we don't have $800 billion just lying around. If the US federal government were to implement a bill like this, it would take up about 20% of all spending. Again, the idea is a good one but can we afford the price tag?

There are options to reduce the price tag.

1. Spread it out over several years
2. Partner with the regions (Though they would have to voluntarily contribute their portion)
3. Dedicated funding stream.

[CMB222]

How about this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Atlasian People's House of Representatives
Pending
[/quote]

Sponsor: Leinad for the President
House Designation: HB 1112
[/quote]

[Dereich]

I've said before on IRC, I don't like this bill. It's a HUGE amount of money and it seems to me FAR in disproportion to the potential damages; construction of barriers, dams, and seawalls can only mitigate (and depending on the disaster only mitigate slightly) the damage from storm surge, not eliminate it. It'd be the Army Corp of Engineers who would get this money. Out of curiosity, I looked up the current US Army Corp of Engineers budget allotment. Here's what I found:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

While admittedly this is from Trump's budget and is slightly reduced from the $4.732 billion from last year, you're still talking about increasing their budget by a factor of 173. I'm all for increasing the ACoE's funding; they do important work and some areas could really benefit. But I'd think even $10 billion would border on unreasonable, let alone $801 billion. Unless I see reputable evidence that these numbers make any kind of sense, I don't see how I can treat this as anything more than a MASSIVE pork scheme.

[CMB222]

The Representative makes a good point. I retract my amendment.

[Terry the Fat Shark]

Well like I said I am open to Amendments, Representative Dereich

Not sure I really like the idea of this being a "Pork scheme" though considering it is an issue I really do care about and did not even propose in my original campaign promises.