I was very pleased to work with my colleagues on the Committee to seek the swift passage of the 1999 Water Resources Development Act during the last session of Congress. I am committed to continuing the Committee's efforts in this session to pass a 2000 Water Resources Development Act on time.
Authorizations are a very important first part of the process of developing and maintaining our nations water resources infrastructure. The equally important second part is having an adequate appropriation of funding to not only construct but also operate and maintain the projects we authorize. I note that the Corps has a backlog of deferred maintenance of about 450 million dollars. This reflects an aging National water resources infrastructure. If we continue to ignore the deterioration of our locks and dams, flood control projects, and parks and recreation areas, we risk disruptions in waterborne commerce, lower levels of protection against floods, reduced service to the recreating public, and environmental damages. We must assure that operation and funding levels are adequate and efficiently allocated to priority needs. I applaud the inclusion in this year's budget of $27 million to begin to a modernization program for Corps of Engineers recreation areas. This is good start in addressing serious problems.
I am also deeply concerned that the level of construction appropriations for the Corps of Engineers Water Resources program is not sufficient to provide for the efficient development of the worthy and needed projects this Committee authorizes. National investment in water resources has not kept pace with our level of economic expansion. While some of this shortfall has been appropriately met by the states, there is also a role for the Federal government. If the steep decline in Federal investment continues, our continued economic expansion and environmental improvement will be threatened.
National public water resources infrastructure investment in 1960 amounted to 1.1% of the GDP. Today the figure is more like .2% of GNP. One of the results of this declining investment is that there are about 400 projects in various stages of implementation which were authorized in past WRDA bills and which have received either design or construction funding.
This represents a $30 billion backlog in Federal funds needed to complete these projects. This figure does not include the Federal share of the $5.6 billion in new projects authorized in WRDA 99 which have not yet received construction funding or the new projects we will be considering for authorization in WRDA 2000.
I recognize that this backlog contains a few projects or increments of projects that are not needed at this time, or, which currently lack non-Federal sponsors. The recent disclosures about segments of the inland navigation systems that are not achieving their projected benefits and allegations about less than objective analysis of the costs and benefits of Upper Mississippi River improvements highlights the need for critical review of authorized projects before any funding decisions are made.
Having said that, the majority of projects in the backlog competing for the limited Corps construction budget have recently been authorized based on the recommendations of this Committee. I am not advocating increased levels of Federal spending as a general matter. The problem is spending our Federal resources on the right things, and among the right things that are not receiving adequate funding are many of the worthy projects authorized by this Committee.
A second area that concerns me about the Corps budget is a seeming lack of regional and state equity in the distribution of projects. I recognize that this is a complex issue involving considerations of population, severity of water resources problems and non-Federal sponsorship. However, the State disparities are striking . For example my State of Ohio has less than $100 million in Federal funding needed to complete ongoing projects while the comparable figure for the State of Florida is almost $3 billion and that's before any consideration of the proposed WRDA 2000 initial authorization of $1.7 billion for Everglades restoration. I believe we need more State equity in the Corps program.
I note that the Administration has once again proposed a new Harbor Services User Fee and Harbor Services User Fund to fund construction and operation and maintenance of the Nation's harbors and channels. The Harbor Services User Fee is proposed to replace the existing Harbor Maintenance Tax, a portion of which the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional in March 1998 and recognizes that the current tax on imports and domestic traffic is not sustainable. I applaud the Administration's efforts to support the construction and operation and maintenance of the Nation's ports and waterways. The development and maintenance of our ports is essential to our national economy including the he economy of the vitally important Great Lakes region. However, in my view, the Administration's Harbor Services User Fee proposal will destroy the very Great Lakes Maritime commerce it seeks to promote and is strongly opposed by both Great Lakes port, carrier, and shipper interests. There is similar national opposition to this proposal. I share these concerns and urge the Administration to withdraw this ill-advised proposal and develop an acceptable replacement.
I mentioned earlier the disclosures in the January 9 and 10th articles in the Washington Post which highlighted a number of segments of the inland waterway system where barge traffic and navigation benefits have fallen far short of projections. This has been followed by the allegations in a February 13th article in the Washington Post that the economic analysis of the Upper Mississippi River Navigation Expansion Project has been distorted to favor a positive recommendation on lock expansion. I am very concerned about these disclosures.
We have already spent about $2 billion in Federal funds to construct the Red River Waterway and navigation benefits are a fraction of those projected. At the same time worthy projects lack funding and or are being constructed on inefficient schedules due to inadequate funding. We cannot afford any more Red Rivers . In authorizing projects it is absolutely essential that the Congress be able to rely on objective and high quality analysis of project costs and benefits by the Corps of Engineers. That it the reason I expanded today's hearing so we can get some answers to these serious concerns.
I look forward to the testimony of Secretary Westphal Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works and Lieutenant General Ballard, Chief of Engineers as they address these issues.