[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1018-S1019]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNFUNDED MANDATES
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I was listening intently as the majority
leader expressed a concern over the lack of progress that we are
making; and certainly we are not making progress.
I also listened intently yesterday to the very distinguished Senator
from West Virginia, as he quoted history and he quoted many of our
Founding Fathers, concerning the subject at hand of unfunded mandates.
I have felt that unfunded mandates are the product of an assertive,
greedy Government that has arrogantly injected itself into the
dictatorial position that was feared most by our Founding Fathers.
And, you know, we deal with these subjects as if they are
contemporary subjects, Mr. President, and they are not. Because in all
of these subjects that we have been discussing that might be associated
with the Contract With America, but certainly those things that 70 to
80 percent of the Americans want, our Founding Fathers dealt with these
issues. They dealt with term limitations. It was their intent to have a
citizens legislature for people to have to live under the laws that we
passed. And, of course, we discussed that under the accountability
bill, and such things as the budget balancing amendment.
It was Thomas Jefferson who came back and said:
If I could have made one improvement in the Constitution,
it would have been to severely limit the abilities of our
Government to incur debt.
And now we are looking at unfunded mandates, which, I think, at the
crux of unfunded mandates is the 10th amendment to the Constitution.
Certainly, James Madison was very eloquent in his discussion of the
10th amendment.
Just so that I do not misquote it, I will read it. The 10th amendment
provides that:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are
reserved to the States respectfully, or to the people.
When you stop and remember what our Founding Fathers came over here
to escape, it was, in fact, tyranny. So many of the problems that we
are looking at in a contemporary way were addressed in the past.
I remember so well, if you think back in the history of this country,
as was discussed by the distinguished Senator from West Virginia
yesterday, we remember that here we were, a handful of farmers and
trappers over here, and we took on the greatest army on the face of
this Earth, knowing that we were signing our own death warrants to do
so, but knowing it was worth it to escape tyranny. That was what it was
all about when that tall redhead stood in the House of Burgesses and
said:
We are not weak if we make a proper use of those means
which the God of Nature has placed in our power. Three
millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and
in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by
any force which our enemy can send against us.
Patrick Henry was saying that we are escaping the tyranny that we
left behind in a foreign country.
Now, where have we come today? Right back to that same tyranny. And
while it is not a contemporary debate, it is now being debated
contemporarily.
I think if you look around and you see of all of those items in the
Contract With America, this is the one that transcends all ideological
lines. It transcends all party lines and interests. This is something
that all of the American people are for.
I listened to the Senator from California [Mrs. Feinstein], I believe
it was a couple of days ago, and she said it so well about what
happened out in San Francisco back when she was the mayor.
And while Mrs. Feinstein and I--perhaps there are no two Senators
further apart ideologically. We certainly agree we have one thing in
common in our backgrounds. We were both mayors of major cities in
America at the same time. In fact, Mr. President, we were on the board
of directors of the U.S. Congress of Mayors at the same time. No one is
going to say, by any interpretation, the U.S. Conference of Mayors is a
conservative operation.
Yet, what was our major concern 15 years ago, when Mrs. Feinstein and
I were both mayors of major cities? It was unfunded mandates. If fellow
Senators will talk to any of the municipal leagues around America and
ask them what is the major problem they are facing in their towns, as
well as their cities and States, they will not say crime, they will not
say welfare; they will say it is unfunded mandates.
We wonder how we got in this situation. It reminds me a little of the
two skeletons in the closet. One rattled to the other and said, ``How
did we get in here?'' And the other said, ``I don't know. If we had any
guts, we would get out.'' I think it is time to get out. I think we got
in because of the propensity of Members of Congress to, in hopes of
getting people something and not having the money to pay for it, find a
way to do it, and that is to force somebody else to pay for it. That is
exactly what is happening.
If we look around--I can take you to the State of Oklahoma, in
Oklahoma City alone. Keep in mind, in our infinite wisdom, we passed
all these bills. In Oklahoma City, in order to comply with the Clean
Water Act, the conservative estimate is $3 million for that city; to
comply with the transportation regulations, and these were the
reflective road signs, the metric conversions, and those things, that
would be $2 million over a 5-year period; land use regulations,
landfills, recycling, $2.5 million; the Clean Water Act, they cannot
proximate it, but it is well over $2 million.
Go to a smaller town or city, such as Broken Arrow, OK: Clean Water
Act, storm water regulations, $100,000. A person may say, what is that?
In Broken Arrow, OK, that is a lot. They are going to have to give up a
police officer to comply with that mandate that came from the Federal
Government. Waste water treatment regulations, $125,000. Safe drinking
water regulations, $40,000. EPA regulations, solid waste, $32,000. Fair
Labor Standards Act, $30,000.
In my city of Tulsa, I checked and brought up to date the figures
that were there back when I was mayor of Tulsa, the Clean Water Act,
$10 million; Safe Drinking Water Act, $16 million; solid waste
regulations $700,000; lead-based paint, $1 million. It goes on and on
and on. I just listed $35 million worth of mandates that are imposed
upon three cities in the State of Oklahoma.
Now, those are direct costs. We get into indirect costs when we look
at other laws that were passed. The Davis-Bacon Act--when I was elected
mayor of the city of Tulsa, we had to make some additions. What do we
do about our capital improvements, because they are in dire need; we
were rotting out from within. So I had to go out on the line, and for a
conservative to do this, it was a very difficult thing, Mr. President.
But I passed a 1-cent sales tax increase for capital improvements; and
it passed.
In order to do this, we calculated, by having to comply with the
Davis-Bacon Act, how much more it costs the taxpayers of this city of
Tulsa, OK. What could we have done without the Davis-Bacon Act: 17
percent more in capital improvements, 6 more miles of roads and
streets, 34 more miles of water and sewer lines, and we could have
hired 500 more people.
I read in the Reader's Digest just the other day something I will
share with Members. In Philadelphia, for example--and this is in
December's Reader's Digest--electricians must be paid $37.97 an hour on
Davis-Bacon projects, while private contractors pay an average of
$15.76. In Oakland, carpenters get $28 an hour on federally funded
projects, and they work for $15 an hour in the private sector. Many are
paying the
[[Page S1019]] price indirectly, and paying dearly, for the price of
the mandates.
I replaced a very distinguished former Senator, David Boren, when I
was elected to the U.S. Senate this past year.
David Boren--he is a Democrat and I am a Republican--was and is today
one of my closest friends. I can remember in 1966, Mr. President, we
were elected to the State legislature. We came up here, and three of us
became very intimate friends: David Boren, myself, and a guy named
Ralph Thompson, who is now a Federal judge, whose name has been
mentioned very prominently as someone who might be a member of the U.S.
Supreme Court someday.
We came up in 1967, almost 30 years ago. What was our mission? On the
first trip when we came to Washington, the mission was to protest the
mandates of Lady Bird's Highway Beautification Act of 1965.
Lastly--I do not want to go over my time, and I am afraid I am
approaching that now--I will say what will happen if we do not do it.
What is going to happen if we do not pass this bill that everyone,
virtually everyone, in America is for? If we do not do it, it will be
done for us. Just to the south of the State of the Senator from
Colorado, in New Mexico, in Catron County, in frustration with dealing
with the U.S. Forest Service, they enacted the U.S. Constitution as a
county ordinance and put the Federal Forest Service on notice to show
up at the county supervisors meeting to get permission to impose
mandates.
Recently, in Walter Williams' column, he talks about the fact that
California has joined Colorado, Missouri, Hawaii, and Illinois in
asserting 10th amendment rights demanding that the Federal Government
cease and desist all mandates and interferences exceeding those
delegated by the Constitution. Similar resolutions have been passed in
12 other States.
Mr. President, that is a total of 17 States. Just nine more States,
and that will be a majority of those States. So I will conclude, and
say that this is something that we will have to start discussing in a
serious vein and actually bringing to a vote. I cannot think of
anything that is more significant that we will be dealing with than
this issue.
As the Reverend Mark Dever said in his prayer, opening the session
today, we want unity of purpose for which we are elected. Without
overly dramatizing, I would say we must free our States and counties
from the bondage to which they have been subverted.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. CAMPBELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The distinguished Senator from Colorado.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, before I make comments, I would like to
associate myself with the comments of my friend, the Senator from
Oklahoma, with whom I have had the privilege of serving for the last 8
years here in the U.S. Capitol.
He brings out certainly another example, and we have heard one after
another, about the punitive action of the Federal Government in forcing
States to comply with unfunded mandates.
Mr. President, I thank the Chair.
(The remarks of Mr. Campbell pertaining to the introduction of S. 234
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Inhofe). The Senator from Wyoming is
recognized to speak for up to 10 minutes.
____________________