[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 6 (Tuesday, February 1, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 1, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                  VOTE ``NO'' ON THE RULE TO H.R. 3425

  (Mr. DeLAY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, what do the Agricultural Retailers 
Association, the National Governors' Association, the National 
Association of Home Builders, the National Federation of Independent 
Business, and the National Association of Water Companies have in 
common? All of these groups support the inclusion of a risk assessment/
cost-benefit amendment to H.R. 3425, legislation elevating the 
Environmental Protection Agency to Cabinet level.
  And they are not alone. The Harvard Center for Risk Analysis found 
that 83 percent of those surveyed agree that ``the Government should 
use risk analysis to identify the most serious environmental problems 
and give them the highest priority in environmental spending 
decisions.'' Likewise, 94 percent of those surveyed agree that ``when 
adopting an environmental regulation, the Government should inform the 
public of the benefits and costs that are expected to result from the 
regulation.''
  It only makes sense. When environmental regulations are costing 
approximately $1,500 per U.S. household, it is obvious that there is a 
problem. That is why the other body voted 95 to 3 in favor of such an 
amendment last year. But the House Democrats will not let us vote on 
Mr. Mica's almost identical amendment. It is an outrage that we are not 
being allowed to consider this common-sense amendment which already has 
passed one House almost unanimously. It is clear that the Democrats are 
afraid of something, and it is that this amendment would surely pass if 
offered. My colleagues, I urge a ``no'' vote tomorrow on the rule to 
this bill. Our constituents deserve more.

                          ____________________