[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 144 (Thursday, October 6, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: October 6, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                   SUPERFUND AND THE DAVIS-BACON ACT

                                 ______


                         HON. NICK J. RAHALL II

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 5, 1994

  Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of discussion in 
recent weeks over the Davis-Bacon Act amendment I sponsored to the 
Superfund Reform Act of 1994. It is now apparent that this legislation, 
unfortunately, will not be enacted by the 103d Congress. However, I did 
want to take this opportunity to set the record straight on my Davis-
Bacon Act issue.
  First, so that there is no confusion, let me make it perfectly clear 
that the Davis-Bacon Act has nothing to do with labor unions.
  The act does not require that labor unions, or any particular labor 
union, conduct work at a federally assisted project.
  Simply put, all that the Davis-Bacon Act requires is that where 
Federal funds are spent on a project, the contractor pays its workers 
the prevailing wage rate for the area where the project is located.
  The prevailing wage rate is vastly different throughout the country.
  For example, the Davis-Bacon wage rate for heavy construction--the 
type of construction applicable to a Superfund project--in Raleigh 
County, WV, which is located within the district I represent in the 
House, is $17.50 an hour.
  Those who oppose the inclusion of my Davis-Bacon Act amendment in the 
reauthorization of the Superfund Act are, in effect, saying that 
workers at a Superfund project that may be located in southern West 
Virginia are not worth $17.50 an hour. I disagree with that premise.
  Let us look at another locale, say, Whitfield County, GA, where the 
Davis-Bacon prevailing wage rate for heavy construction is $6.84 an 
hour.
  Few would dispute that at the very least we should be willing to pay 
workers $6.84 an hour to engage in the risky business of removing 
hazardous and toxic wastes from Superfund sites.
  The point is that under my amendment to the Superfund reauthorization 
bill, the prevailing wage rate in Raleigh County, WV, would continue to 
be $17.50 an hour and it would continue to be $6.84 an hour in 
Whitfield County, GA. As I mentioned, the prevailing wage rate is 
vastly different throughout the country and my amendment has no bearing 
whatsoever on what it happens to be.
  The second point I would raise as a matter of clarification is that 
my amendment maintains Davis-Bacon Act coverage only where Federal 
funding exists. In the event no Federal funds are involved at a cleanup 
project, under the amendment the Davis-Bacon Act would not apply.
  As such, this amendment is similar to some 60 other related Davis-
Bacon Act provisions in current law where Congress has provided that 
federally financed and assisted construction projects are subject to 
prevailing wage standards. These provisions apply to a wide variety of 
Federal aid, grant, insurance, guarantee, and loan programs involving 
everything from the construction of housing to mass transportation and 
airport redevelopment projects.
  Finally, I believe that in our efforts to reauthorize and reform the 
Superfund Act, we must not ignore one fundamental fact: environmental 
restoration without fair compensation to the workers is simply not 
enough.
  In addition, by providing for the prevailing wage rate to be paid at 
federally assisted Superfund projects, we are ensuring that a well-
trained work force will be employed.
  And by using a well-trained work force, money will be saved because 
the project will be done right, the first time, and not have to be 
revisited time after time as is so often the case today.
  In conclusion, it is my observation that the Davis-Bacon Act 
amendment has been used in recent weeks by certain interests as an 
excuse to scuttle the Superfund Act reauthorization bill for reasons 
that are totally unrelated to the issue of paying prevailing wage rates 
to workers. Perhaps next year, in the light of a new Congress, these 
agendas that are completely unrelated to the Davis-Bacon Act may be 
exposed and dealt with in a more forthright fashion so that the Nation 
can get on with the business of restoring the environment while 
providing for adequate compensation to those who engage in 
environmental restoration projects.

                          ____________________