Flood Protection on a Tough Political Road

Our timing could have been better.

The epic flood hit two years ago just before the global economy sank, and not long after Hurricane Katrina transformed federal disaster recovery into a fortress of red tape. Other disasters drenched and smashed the nation in the meantime. We really should have scheduled our calamity for a more convenient moment.

Now, city leaders are preparing to make a case to the D.C. powers that be, the assistant U.S. Secretary of the Army, to the Congress and maybe even to Honest Abe's stone-faced statue, that we need a $375 million flood protection system.

They'll be making that case just as the crosswinds of a midterm election gather strength and blow through Capitol Hill and the Statehouse, potentially changing the guard. They'll be seeking Water Resources Development Act funding while damage to water resources from an oily onslaught remains fresh along the Gulf Coast and beyond.

Again, our timing could be better. Instead, we have work to do.

Folks here have this nutty notion that both the east and west side of the Cedar River need protection. The Army Corps, helpful but also hemmed in by outdated models, recommends protecting only the east side. Downtown, Quaker, etc., get shielded. Everybody else grits their teeth and crosses their fingers.

The city issued its own draft report for Washington's powerful eyes Monday, arguing that Cedar Rapids is worth saving, regardless of what the Corps contends. The city's report calls protecting both sides of the river an issue of “environmental justice,” while also pointing out that leaving this city vulnerable puts the regional and state economy at risk.

“We have to win this,” said City Council member Chuck Wieneke. Easier said than done.

Getting anything through Congress is tough, but narrowed Democratic majorities or a Republican takeover of one or both chambers could bring enough tumult to make things tougher next year.

If Terry Branstad wins today's GOP primary and becomes governor, he intends to slice state spending and won't issue more bonds for infrastructure efforts. If the city needs tens of millions of dollars from the state, it may find tough going. Branstad's small-bore response to the flood of 1993 may be telling.

The competition for water resources is already fierce. The oil spill's impact is unknown at this point, but it's potentially daunting.

In the past, the state's presidential caucus prominence could have shined a light on Cedar Rapids' situation. But few leading contenders for the GOP nomination are in any position to do much. The field looks to be heavy with Fox News contributors but light on members of Congress with any power.

And perhaps the most important effort of all, to a federal-state effort to better manage the Cedar and Iowa River watersheds, has made only baby steps. It could be decades before land use practices are changed enough to make a difference when heavy rains pour down.

City leaders say, rightly, that changing politics won't change the need for protection. They're optimistic Congress and eventually Des Moines will listen. They make a strong case.

In time, we'll find out if they're right.

Comments: (319) 398-8452; todd.dorman@gazcomm.com