DOCSLIB.ORG

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: an Evaluation of the Project Partnership Agreement Process

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: an Evaluation of the Project Partnership Agreement Process A Report by a Panel of the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION A Report to the Secretary of the Army The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: An Evaluation of the Project Partnership Agreement Process November 2018 Front Cover Photo Poplar Island, recently on the verge of disappearing, is today a national model for habitat restoration and the beneficial use of dredged material. Just off the Chesapeake Bay coastline, about 34 miles south of Baltimore in Talbot County, Maryland, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is working to return Poplar Island to its former size and important ecological function while helping to ensure the economic vitality of the region. Working in partnership with the Maryland Port Authority and other federal and state agencies, the USACE is using approximately 68 million cubic yards of dredged material from the Baltimore Harbor and Channels Federal navigation projects to develop 735 acres of wetlands, 840 acres of uplands, and 140 acres of open water embayment. A Report by a Panel of the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION November 30, 2018 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: An Evaluation of the Project Partnership Agreement Process A Report to the Secretary of the Army PANEL OF FELLOWS Joseph Westphal*, Chair Peter Basso* Gerald Galloway* Kingsley Haynes* Mamie Parker* *Academy Fellow Officers of the Academy Anne Khademian*, Chair of the Board Jeffrey Neal*, Vice Chair Teresa W. Gerton*, President and Chief Executive Officer Myra Howze Shiplett*, Secretary Jonathan Fiechter*, Treasurer Study Team Roger Kodat, Program Area Director Pamela Haze*, Project Director Ken Ryder*, Senior Advisor Maria Rapuano, Senior Advisor Jonathan Tucker, Senior Advisor Hailey Ellsworth, Research Associate Richard Pezzella, Research Associate Luke Lockwood, Intern *Academy Fellow The views expressed in this report are those of the Panel. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the Academy, as an institution. National Academy of Public Administration 1600 K Street, N.W. Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006 www.napawash.org November 30, 2018 Printed in the United States of America Academy Project Number: 10228 About the Academy The National Academy of Public Administration (the Academy) is an independent non-profit, non-partisan organization established in 1967. Chartered by Congress in 1984, the Academy provides expert advice to government leaders in building more effective, efficient, accountable, and transparent organizations. To carry out this mission, the Academy draws on the knowledge and expertise of its over 900 Fellows— including former cabinet officers, Members of Congress, governors, mayors, and state legislators, as well as prominent scholars, business executives, and public administrators. The Academy assists public institutions address their most critical governance and management challenges through in-depth studies and analyses, advisory services and technical assistance, congressional testimony, forms and conferences, and online stakeholder engagement. Learn more about the Academy and its work at www.NAPAwash.org. i This page is intentionally blank Foreword The U.S. Corps of Engineers (USACE) works in collaboration with nonfederal entities in the development of water resource projects. The USACE and nonfederal sponsors enter into Project Partnership Agreements (PPA) that define legal requirements for cost sharing and assign responsibilities for the completion of projects for flood and coastal storm risk management, commercial navigation, aquatic ecosystem restoration, and other purposes. The USACE plays a critical role in maintaining and supporting a strong and resilient water infrastructure system for the nation. Section 1013 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 directs the Secretary of the Army to contract with the National Academy of Public Administration (the Academy) for a comprehensive review of the PPA process and to submit the Academy’s findings to the Senate Committee on Public Works and House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.1 Pursuant to this direction, the Academy conducted an evaluation of the PPA process under contract with USACE and with guidance and input from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works [ASA (CW)]. This report of a Panel of five Academy Fellows provides the results of their extensive information collection and analysis, based on research, interviews, and site visits conducted over the period of April – August 2018. The report describes the process for developing, negotiating, and approving PPAs; assesses recent changes in the process; evaluates sponsor and stakeholder input; and includes recommendations to improve the process. As a congressionally chartered non-partisan and non-profit organization with over 900 distinguished Fellows, the Academy brings nationally recognized public administration experts together to help public organizations address future challenges. We are pleased to have had the opportunity to work with the U.S. Army to conduct this review. We appreciate the constructive engagement of the ASA (CW) and USACE and the contributions of many sponsors and other stakeholders, all of whom were generous with their time and thoughtful input. I extend my thanks to the Academy Panel who offered their invaluable expertise and keen analysis and to the professional study team that provided critical support throughout the project. I expect this report will contribute to improvements in the PPA process and help the USACE and their nonfederal sponsors. Teresa W. Gerton President and Chief Executive Officer National Academy 1 Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA), P.L. 113-121 (2014) ii This page is intentionally blank Contents About the Academy ................................................................................................................................................................... i Foreword .................................................................................................................................................................................... ii Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................ iii Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 Report Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Recommendation 3.1 ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Recommendation 3.2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Recommendation 3.3 ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Recommendation 3.4 ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Recommendation 3.5 ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Recommendation 4.1 ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Recommendation 4.2 ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Chapter One: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 5 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ............................................................................................................................... 5 The Academy’s Charge ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 Project Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................... 8 Organization of the Report ............................................................................................................................................. 9 Chapter Two: Organization and Background............................................................................................................. 11 Organizational Structure and Responsibilities .................................................................................................... 11 Project Partnerships ....................................................................................................................................................... 12 Project Authorization and Funding .......................................................................................................................... 13 Project Development ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Changes Since 2014 ........................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • USACE Water Management
    USACE Water Management Flood Response: NASA Workshop 14 June 2016 Chandra S. Pathak, PhD, PE Tony Young, PE US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Agenda • Background of USACE • Flood Risk Management • Corps Water Management System (CWMS) • CWMS National Implementation Plan • Falls Lake and John H. Kerr Projects • Summary and Conclusion • Questions and Discussion BUILDING STRONG® 2 Why USACE in Water Resources? . 1802: Modern Corps of Engineers founded; West Point established as first U.S. engineering school ► President Jefferson’s concept: a body of engineers able to take on work of “a civil nature” as well as military work . 1824: General Survey Act: Corps authorized to survey road and canal routes on national military or commercial significance . 1824: Rivers & Harbors Act authorized first Corps work in clearing obstacles on Ohio, Mississippi Rivers and at ports . 1850: Congress authorizes first Corps studies of potential flooding on Mississippi River . 1879: Mississippi River Commission established . 1914: Panama Canal completed . 1927: Great Mississippi River Flood . 1928: Flood Control Act establishes Mississippi River & Tributaries (MR&T) Flood Control project BUILDING STRONG 3 ® Milestones of USACE . 1936: Flood Control Act establishes nationwide Corps protection mission . ~1935-65: “Big Dam Era” . 1955: USACE flood-fighting and repair of flood control works authorized under P.L. 84-99 . 1970: National Environmental Policy Act requires environmental analysis of all proposed Corps activities . 1986: Water Resources Development Act requires cost sharing for most projects • 1988: Stafford Act gives FEMA responsibility to coordinate government-wide emergency response efforts. Federal Response Plan includes 28 Federal agencies and non- government organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Federal Water Resources Programs, 1800-1960 ABSTRACT
    Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION N0.1233 A History of Federal Water Resources Programs, 1800-1960 ABSTRACT This publication discusses most of the significant Federal water resources legislation up to 1960 and describes the programs of U.S. planning and construction agencies; the extent of Federal river basin planning and development up to 1960; and the beginning of Federal encouragement of and cooperation with State and local planning. Also discussed are national political issues related to water resources; relationships between Congress and the Executive and between Federal planning agencies; and the origins and continuation of traditional Federal policies and programs favoring natural resources development to strengthen the economic condition of smaller cities, agriculture, and the West. The final chapter investigates the extent to which, after World War II, the Federal "water establishment" became aware of and able to cope with the water resources problems resulting from unprecedented growth of metropolitan centers and technological change. Keywords: Water resources, planning, development, legislation, agencies, river basins, water politics, study commissions. Cover illustration is one panel of a mural, "The Building of a Dam," painted by William Gropper in 1937. The mural is in the main building of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. 20250 u S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE June 1972 Economic Research Service PREFACE This publication presents a history of Federal water post-World War II period. This division of history into resources planning and development programs from "eras" is necessarily arbitrary. An attempt has been 1800 to 1960.
    [Show full text]
  • National Promotion Op Western Roads Amd Canals3
    NATIONAL PROMOTION OP WESTERN ROADS AMD CANALS3 1785-1830 APPROVED: Ma'j or" t'YoTcssor*' .'•/i.'ioi i'rotessor *ector or f.iio DepartffipT of History Do an"®'!:" "tHo""Gr7uIi^aTe^cKoo'i, NATIONAL PROMOTION OF WESTERN ROADS AND CANALS, 1785-1830 THESIS Presented to the Graduate Council o£ the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS By John R, Hoffmann, A. B, Denton, Texas August, 1969 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS iv Chapter I. EARLY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS . 1 II. WESTERN DEMANDS FOR FEDERAL AID 20 III. MADISON, MONROE AND CONSTITU- TIONALITY 45 IV. ADAMS' FRUSTRATED NATIONALISM 6 8 V. CONCLUSION. 06 APPENDIX 102 BIBLIOGRAPHY 10 3 111 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Principal Roads and Canals, 1785-1830 102 CHAPTER I EARLY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS It was obvious from the beginning of our nation that development of communications would be among the chief prob- lems of so large and sparsely populated a country as the United States. Colonial leaders had talked of canals along the Atlantic seaboard, of a waterway from the Hudson to the Great Lakes, of improving the principal rivers flowing into the Atlantic and of connecting them with the western waters by roads across the most convenient portages. In the last two decades of the eighteenth century, state and private enterprise, promoted by George Washington and other land speculators and politicians, attacked all these tasks. On the whole, they failed. Scarcity of capital, local jealousies and conflicts of state interests put the more ambitious im- provements temporarily beyond the power of any American agency less well-financed than the federal government,^" Following the American Revolution, capital was scarce in the new American states.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1. Management of Mississippi and Ohio River Landscapes
    Management of Mississippi and Ohio River Landscapes wo powerful rivers, these rivers for1 navigation Tthe Ohio and Missis- and to protect communities, sippi, and their tributaries agriculture, and other high- drain more than 41% of the value land uses. Alongside attempts interior continental United States to control the height and courses of of America (map 1.1). Their shifting these rivers and their tributaries, diversion paths have shaped and reshaped the landscapes ditches and systematic draining of interior swamps through which they flow and the confluence (map 1.2) and wetlands have transformed hydric but fertile soils where their sediment-laden waters comingle on the into highly productive, intensely managed agricultural voyage to the Gulf of Mexico. Changing climates and lands. Paradoxically, these infrastructure investments, extreme weather events over the millennia have carved intended to facilitate navigation and reduce direct risks new channels through river bottomlands, leaving rock- of flooding, have led to unexpected consequences to exposed uplands and fertile valleys behind while altering the larger ecosystem. Recent levee breaching has cre- the location where the Ohio and Mississippi rivers meet. ated unanticipated shocks to the river ecosystem while These great rivers often became state boundaries, and generating new knowledge about hydrology, soils, and their historic realignments have added and subtracted the vegetation of rivers and their bottomlands. The oc- land from many states that border them. For much of casional failure of well-engineered structures reminds their history, the lands adjacent to these rivers were low- us that the river landscape is a complex human-natural lying bottomlands that, unconstrained by human struc- system.
    [Show full text]
  • American Military History: a Resource for Teachers and Students
    AMERICAN MILITARY HISTORY A RESOURCE FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS PAUL HERBERT & MICHAEL P. NOONAN, EDITORS WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY WALTER A. MCDOUGALL AUGUST 2013 American Military History: A Resource for Teachers and Students Edited by Colonel (ret.) Paul H. Herbert, Ph.D. & Michael P. Noonan, Ph.D. August 2013 About the Foreign Policy Research Institute Founded in 1955 by Ambassador Robert Strausz-Hupé, FPRI is a non-partisan, non-profit organization devoted to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the development of policies that advance U.S. national interests. In the tradition of Strausz-Hupé, FPRI embraces history and geography to illuminate foreign policy challenges facing the United States. In 1990, FPRI established the Wachman Center, and subsequently the Butcher History Institute, to foster civic and international literacy in the community and in the classroom. About First Division Museum at Cantigny Located in Wheaton, Illinois, the First Division Museum at Cantigny Park preserves, interprets and presents the history of the United States Army’s 1st Infantry Division from 1917 to the present in the context of American military history. Part of Chicago’s Robert R. McCormick Foundation, the museum carries on the educational legacy of Colonel McCormick, who served as a citizen soldier in the First Division in World War I. In addition to its main galleries and rich holdings, the museum hosts many educational programs and events and has published over a dozen books in support of its mission. FPRI’s Madeleine & W.W. Keen Butcher History Institute Since 1996, the centerpiece of FPRI’s educational programming has been our series of weekend-long conferences for teachers, chaired by David Eisenhower and Walter A.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Large Federal Dams: Planning, Design, and Construction in the Era of Big Dams
    THE HISTORY OF LARGE FEDERAL DAMS: PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION IN THE ERA OF BIG DAMS David P. Billington Donald C. Jackson Martin V. Melosi U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Denver Colorado 2005 INTRODUCTION The history of federal involvement in dam construction goes back at least to the 1820s, when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers built wing dams to improve navigation on the Ohio River. The work expanded after the Civil War, when Congress authorized the Corps to build storage dams on the upper Mississippi River and regulatory dams to aid navigation on the Ohio River. In 1902, when Congress established the Bureau of Reclamation (then called the “Reclamation Service”), the role of the federal government increased dramati- cally. Subsequently, large Bureau of Reclamation dams dotted the Western land- scape. Together, Reclamation and the Corps have built the vast majority of ma- jor federal dams in the United States. These dams serve a wide variety of pur- poses. Historically, Bureau of Reclamation dams primarily served water storage and delivery requirements, while U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dams supported QDYLJDWLRQDQGÀRRGFRQWURO)RUERWKDJHQFLHVK\GURSRZHUSURGXFWLRQKDVEH- come an important secondary function. This history explores the story of federal contributions to dam planning, design, and construction by carefully selecting those dams and river systems that seem particularly critical to the story. Written by three distinguished historians, the history will interest engineers, historians, cultural resource planners, water re- source planners and others interested in the challenges facing dam builders. At the same time, the history also addresses some of the negative environmental consequences of dam-building, a series of problems that today both Reclamation and the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • American Military History
    AMERICAN MILITARY HISTORY A RESOURCE FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS PAUL HERBERT & MICHAEL P. NOONAN, EDITORS WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY WALTER A. MCDOUGALL AUGUST 2013 American Military History: A Resource for Teachers and Students Edited by Colonel (ret.) Paul H. Herbert, Ph.D. & Michael P. Noonan, Ph.D. August 2013 About the Foreign Policy Research Institute Founded in 1955 by Ambassador Robert Strausz-Hupé, FPRI is a non-partisan, non-profit organization devoted to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the development of policies that advance U.S. national interests. In the tradition of Strausz-Hupé, FPRI embraces history and geography to illuminate foreign policy challenges facing the United States. In 1990, FPRI established the Wachman Center, and subsequently the Butcher History Institute, to foster civic and international literacy in the community and in the classroom. About First Division Museum at Cantigny Located in Wheaton, Illinois, the First Division Museum at Cantigny Park preserves, interprets and presents the history of the United States Army’s 1st Infantry Division from 1917 to the present in the context of American military history. Part of Chicago’s Robert R. McCormick Foundation, the museum carries on the educational legacy of Colonel McCormick, who served as a citizen soldier in the First Division in World War I. In addition to its main galleries and rich holdings, the museum hosts many educational programs and events and has published over a dozen books in support of its mission. FPRI’s Madeleine & W.W. Keen Butcher History Institute Since 1996, the centerpiece of FPRI’s educational programming has been our series of weekend-long conferences for teachers, chaired by David Eisenhower and Walter A.
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-10-819 Army Corps of Engineers
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to the Chairman, Committee on GAO Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives September 2010 ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Organizational Realignment Could Enhance Effectiveness, but Several Challenges Would Have to Be Overcome GAO-10-819 September 2010 Accountability Integrity Reliability ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Highlights Organizational Realignment Could Enhance Highlights of GAO-10-819, a report to the Effectiveness, but Several Challenges Would Have to Chairman, Committee on Transportation Be Overcome and Infrastructure, House of Representatives Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found The U.S. Army Corp of Engineers’ Since 1893, the Corps has had mixed results in modifying its organizational (Corps) civil works mission has alignment in response to its changing mission, budget, staffing, and workload, grown over the years, while its but the fundamental structure has remained the same. For example, the Corps three-tiered headquarters, division, has added capacity and staff in response to its expanding mission, which now and district structure has remained includes nine functional areas. Additionally, from 1994 to 2003, the Corps the same since it was created in 1893. GAO was asked to examine experienced static funding levels and responded by launching an effort that for the Civil Works Program (1) realigned the agency roles, functions, and processes to improve the efficiency over time, how the Corps has of the Civil Works Program. In contrast to these efforts, other past proposals realigned its organization to take for realignment have not been implemented. For example, in 1992, the Corps into account its changing mission, proposed reducing the number of district offices in response to a diminished budget, staffing, and workload; (2) workload and budget.
    [Show full text]
  • The Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Antebellum
    The Booth School of Business, University of Chicago Antebellum Tariff Politics: Regional Coalitions and Shifting Economic Interests Author(s): Douglas A. Irwin Source: The Journal of Law & Economics, Vol. 51, No. 4 (November 2008), pp. 715-741 Published by: The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business, University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/590131 Accessed: 10-04-2018 12:47 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms The University of Chicago Law School, The Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, The University of Chicago Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Law & Economics This content downloaded from 130.127.15.229 on Tue, 10 Apr 2018 12:47:14 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Antebellum Tariff Politics: Regional Coalitions and Shifting Economic Interests Douglas A. Irwin Dartmouth College Abstract Throughout U.S. history, import tariffs have been put on a sustained downward path in only two instances: from the early 1830s until the Civil War and from the mid-1930s to the present.
    [Show full text]
  • River Activism, “Levees-Only” and the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927
    www.ssoar.info River activism, "levees-only" and the great Mississippi flood of 1927 Randolph, Ned Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Randolph, N. (2018). River activism, "levees-only" and the great Mississippi flood of 1927. Media and Communication, 6(1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i1.1179 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY Lizenz (Namensnennung) zur This document is made available under a CC BY Licence Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden (Attribution). For more Information see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de Media and Communication (ISSN: 2183–2439) 2018, Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages 43–51 DOI: 10.17645/mac.v6i1.1179 Article River Activism, “Levees-Only” and the Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 Ned Randolph Department of Communication, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA; E-Mail: [email protected] Submitted: 26 September 2017 | Accepted: 15 November | Published: 9 February 2018 Abstract This article investigates media coverage of 19th and early 20th century river activism and its effect on federal policy to control the Mississippi River. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ “levees-only” policy—which joined disparate navigation and flood control interests—is largely blamed for the Great Flood of 1927, called the largest peacetime disaster in Amer- ican history. River activists organized annual conventions, and later, professional lobbies organized media campaigns up and down the Mississippi River to sway public opinion and pressure Congress to fund flood control and river navigation projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Selected History of Public Works and Infrastructure
    SELECTED HISTORY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, 1775-2012 Great Wall of China Photo by Expedition 10 Commander Leroy Chiao, 2004, on International Space Station. NASA, http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/earthday/gall_greatwall.html. Lewis, Carol W. and W. Bartley Hildreth, 2012. Budgeting: Politics and Power, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press 2 1775, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers founded 1791, Pennsylvania began the first comprehensive state road program 1801, Philadelphia opens water system that pumps water through wooden mains (but major problems in the design persisted until 1822) 1803, The Louisiana Purchase 1806, Congress authorizes the first internal improvement, the National Road from Cumberland, Maryland on the Potomac River to Wheeling, Virginia on the Ohio River 1808, U.S. Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin issued “Report on Roads and Canals” 1811, Construction began on the National Road 1816, Erie Canal Commission created 1817, Construction began on 365-mile Erie Canal in New York 1820, Congress authorized extension of National Road to St. Louis (Mississippi River) 1824, Congress enacts the General Survey Act authorizing the Army Corps of Engineers to survey roads, canals, and later railroads 1837, Financial panic led to 1839 depression, and over next few years to several state governments defaulting on and/or repudiating debt 1840, Congress declines to fund National Road beyond Ohio 1842, New York City opened a water system designed around the Croton River dam, a covered aqueduct and city reservoir. 1848, Acquisition of Upper California by the United States 1851, Illinois chartered a municipal water system 1853, New York State authorized the purchase of 700 acres for what is now Central Park in New York City Lewis, Carol W.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vast System of Interconnected Highways: Before the Interstates by Richard F
    A Vast System of Interconnected Highways: Before the Interstates By Richard F. Weingroff Table of Contents A Vast System of Interconnected Highways: ................................................................................. 1 Before the Interstates ...................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 19th Century Part 1 ......................................................................................................................... 3 The Gallatin Plan, 1807 .............................................................................................................. 3 The Bonus Bill, 1817 ................................................................................................................ 12 A Very Important Circumstance ............................................................................................... 17 Secretary of War Calhoun’s Report .......................................................................................... 19 The American System ............................................................................................................... 20 President Monroe’s Veto .......................................................................................................... 21 The General Survey Act of 1824 .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]