[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 65 (Monday, May 23, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
             MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE FLOW CONTROL ACT OF 1994

 Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I rise today to urge my 
colleagues to join Senator Helfin and me in cosponsoring S. 1634, the 
Municipal Solid Waste Flow Control Act of 1994. For 2 years now, the 
preservation of flow control has been a primary objective of our 
Nation's local governments. And now, in light of last Monday's Supreme 
Court ruling in the Carbone case, it is critical that we in Congress 
make it ours.
  For decades, flow control ordinances have given local governments 
authority to decide how and where they will dispose of their waste. 
These ordinances have enabled our cities, countries, towns, and 
townships to finance and implement waste management facilities best 
equipped to preserve the environment and protect the public health. 
But, according to the Supreme Court, unless Congress says otherwise, 
this important authority of local government must now come to an end.
  Minnesota alone can offer 22 reasons why Congress must say otherwise. 
That is because 22 of the counties in my home State stand to lose not 
only the substantial environmental and health benefits gained from flow 
control, but the enormous financial investment they made in it as well.
  Under flow control, local governments generally build their own 
designated waste facility and finance the construction through revenue 
bonds, or they contract with a private waste management company. In 
either event, these designated facilities invariably meet a higher 
standard than typical landfills and must usually charge haulers a 
higher tipping fee. Without local authority to direct waste to these 
designated facilities, haulers will instead move that waste to the 
nearest landfill boasting low tipping fees and safety standards to 
match. Consequently, by denying local residents control over their 
waste once it hits the curb, we deny them important environmental and 
public health benefits, leave them knee-deep in debt, and wide open to 
potential Superfund liability.
  Flow control represents a lot of effort and an enormous financial 
commitment on the part of people from all over the country who invested 
in an infrastructure to better protect their communities and the people 
who live in them. And, while I cannot possibly quantify their human 
efforts, I can illustrate their investment. Today, the outstanding debt 
owed by local governments on waste management facilities throughout the 
country is estimated at $10 billion. In Minnesota alone, the debt 
stands at $325.4 million. Virginia and California each have a debt 
totaling nearly $500 million. Connecticut, $600 million, And, New 
Jersey and Florida, $1.5 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively. By 
allowing the Carbone decision to stand, Congress will commit a waste 
unlike anything these local governments have ever seen--a waste of 
effort and hard-earned tax dollars.
  Mr. President, in her concurring opinion in Carbone, Justice 
O'Connor--who was once a State legislator and champion of local 
governments--seemingly went out of her way to state:

       It is within Congress' power to authorize local imposition 
     of flow control. Should Congress revisit this area, and enact 
     legislation providing a clear indication that it intends 
     States and localities to implement flow control, we will, of 
     course, defer to that * * * judgement.

  In 1992, I invited Congress to approve flow control. Now 2 years 
later, Justice O'Connor appears to be extending the same invitation. 
Congress would do well to accept.

                          ____________________