[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 7 (Wednesday, February 2, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 2, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
URGING OPPOSITION TO THE RULE ON H.R. 3425, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL 
                             PROTECTION ACT

  (Mr. PORTMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for 
1 minute.)
  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
oppose the rule on the EPA bill when it comes up this afternoon. It 
bars consideration of a number of crucially important amendments 
including the Mica-Thurman amendment on risk assessment.
  Environmental concerns are increasingly important to our Nation and 
the Federal Government, through the EPA, must be fully prepared to meet 
these challenges. That is why I support the George Bush initiative to 
elevate the EPA to Cabinet-level status. However, I strongly oppose the 
rule.
  In particular, the House should not be precluded from voting on the 
Mica-Thurman amendment. It is a simple idea: The amendment requires the 
EPA to analyze the relative costs and benefits of its proposals. 
Billions are spent annually to comply with EPA regulations. State and 
local governments alone are forced to spend $30 to $40 billion per 
year. These are the detrimental unfunded mandates Governor George 
Voinovich of Ohio and other Governors on a bipartisan basis have 
rightly highlighted this week. It seems only appropriate to require the 
Agency promulgating these mandates to consider their economic impact. 
It is proposal, I might add, which the other body adopted by a vote of 
95-3.
  Yet, we cannot even get a vote on it. That is just wrong. I urge my 
colleagues to do the right thing and defeat the rule.

                          ____________________