Rivers and Harbors Act

The first rivers and harbors bill in the United States was created in 1822 to provide congressional funding for the general upkeep or replacement of lighthouses, buoys, and other tools of navigation that would create hazardous conditions if left unattended. Before 1822, such expenses were funded by individual states. Over time, the growing need for infrastructure to serve both local communities and commercial expansion across state lines created a shift in the rivers and harbors bill. What were originally funds applied to address immediate problems with existing structures, increasingly became funds earmarked for improvements through the creation of new structures. Recognizing this shift is the key to understanding the political turmoil surrounding the evolution of the rivers and harbors bill.

From 1865 to 1882, the Mississippi River flooded four times, cresting over levees that had been damaged during the U.S. Civil War. In 1882, the severity of the flooding led to a rising tide of controversy in Congress over an increase in funding for the annual rivers and harbors bill. Citing pork-barrel legislation concerns, President Chester A. Arthur vetoed the 1882 Rivers and Harbors Bill because he did not think the funding would be distributed fairly among the communities that needed it. Congress managed to override the veto, granting $5.4 million to the Mississippi River Commission under the 1882 Rivers and Harbors Act.

The Mississippi River Commission, established in 1879, was one of the earliest governing agencies [Page 763]granted jurisdiction over a major domestic waterway, thus superseding the jurisdiction of individual states. The commission's executive body reported directly to the secretary of war and handled concerns regarding navigation, infrastructure, and other matters, in addition to flooding problems.

In 1892, Emory R. Johnson, a noted expert in the field of transportation and commerce, succinctly summarized the history of rivers and harbors bills and the political debate over federal funding. He was probably the first U.S. scholar to document the juxtaposition of the social and commercial concerns affecting the rivers and harbors bills in an academic publication. His essay also demonstrated the need for the United States to learn from the efforts of England and France in these matters.