[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 77 (Wednesday, May 10, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H4688-H4690]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                             {time}   1245

  Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Gekas].
  (Mr. GEKAS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, Members of the House, I appreciate the 
opportunity to speak on the rule which I support and then to assert 
that my support for the bill itself is based on several propositions.
  No. 1, I am impressed by the fact that this is a bipartisan piece of 
legislation that has reached the floor. One can only read the results 
of the subcommittee vote and the full committee vote to assert for 
themselves that this is indeed a bipartisan crafted piece of 
legislation. That in itself answers the request of the American people 
that we approach this and many other problems in our country on that 
bipartisan basis for which they have been yearning for so many years. 
Here is an excellent opportunity to put into play our search for 
bipartisan solutions to the Nation's problems.
  No. 2, if that were not enough, it also is bipartisan in this 
particular unique tenant about which I am concerned. The Chesapeake Bay 
has for a long time been a strong concern of the environmental 
community of our Nation, and not only nationwide are the 
environmentalists interested in the preservation, and the clean up and 
the stabilization of Chesapeake Bay, but naturally the regional 
interests, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, et cetera, are also 
interested in the preservation of the Chesapeake Bay as we once knew 
it. In that regard this bill calls for adoption, as a matter of fact, 
of increase in, the President's recommendation for reauthorization of 
that portion that has to do with funding the Chesapeake Bay, another 
facet of the bipartisan approach that we can adopt by supporting the 
committee's version of this vital piece of legislation.
  Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
  Mr. PALLONE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the open rule but 
against the bill. I think it is very important that we do have an open 
rule without time limits on this legislation because it is so 
controversial, and I do believe that the bill makes fundamental changes 
to the Clean Water Act that are not in the national interest.
  I was very pleased to hear my colleague, the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Saxton], speak before because he pointed out and reminded 
me about the fact that when we were first elected to the Congress, back 
in the mid or late 1980's, that a big part of our election was because 
we swore that we would come down here and try to stop ocean dumping and 
improve ocean water quality. The fact of the matter is that since those 
New Jersey beach closings in 1987 and 1988 the ocean water quality and 
the quality of our rivers and harbors have increased dramatically in 
the State of the New Jersey and throughout the country. People tell us 
every day, and in particular looking forward to the beach season this 
summer, they talk about how improved the water quality is and how many 
people want to come down to the shore and swim and enjoy our beaches 
and our water.
  We cannot turn the clock back, and my fear
   is that this is what this legislation does. It in effect turns the 
clock back and makes it very possible that, if it were to pass 5, 10, 
20 years from now, our water quality would significantly decrease.

  I would want to mention a few things, and some of them were mentioned 
by my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], 
specifically about what the bill does and how it is dangerous.
  With regard to coastal run off, contaminated run off is the number 
one contributor to water pollution. The committee bill would end an 
existing program mandating States to draw up enforceable run-off 
control plans in coastal zones, replacing with a voluntary approach 
similar to an existing program in inland areas. Environmentalists and 
the EPA have said that our efforts should be directed toward making 
run-off programs enforceable, not voluntary.
  With regard to storm water, the bill would repeal an existing formal 
permitting process governing city and industrial storm water releases 
into service water, replacing it with a system emphasizing voluntary 
measures of compliance, again voluntary rather than mandatory.
  With regard to wetlands, by changing definitions, the proposed 
legislation would remove as much as half of the Nation's wetlands from 
protection. The EPA would also be stripped of its veto power of 
decisions by the Army Corps of Engineers to grant wetlands development 
permits.
  My colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], mentioned a 
substitute, and we also from New Jersey have several amendments that 
would try to improve and eliminate some of these more egregious 
measures that are in the bill. I urge my colleagues on the Democrat 
side to support the Saxton-Boehlert substitute. This substitute would 
eliminate some of the worst problems that exist in this bill.
  I was hopeful, however, that this would be the opportunity, during 
the authorization of the Clean Water Act, to actually improve the 
existing Clean Water Act, and so I have proposed, pursuant to this open 
rule again, certain amendments that would actually improve the existing 
law. I am not sure, and I think perhaps in this atmosphere it is 
unlikely that some of these will pass, but it is important to put them 
forward.
  One of them is the Clean Water Enforcement Act. We have noticed that 
with the existing Clean Water Act there has not been sufficient
 enforcement. In many cases it pays to pollute because the fines that 
are imposed for pollution or violating one's discharge permit are too 
small. The Clean Water Enforcement Act would go after the bad actors, 
the repeat violators of their discharge permits, require mandatory 
penalties and increasing penalties so that it does not pay to pollute.

  Another amendment that I will be proposing today under the open rule 
is something that my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. 
Hughes], has repeatedly introduced and had passed in this House several 
times in previous sessions of Congress that would basically require a 
national program for beach water quality testing. In New Jersey we have 
a very good program that requires the testing of water quality before 
we decide whether beaches are open to bathers. I would like to see that 
included in the Clean Water Act, and again that would be a 
strengthening amendment.
  [[Page H4689]] I would urge my colleagues today to, please, support 
the substitute. Please support some of the amendments being put forth 
by those of us who would like to see the Clean Water Act improved.
  Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from California [Mr. Cunningham].
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman from Colorado [Mrs. 
Schroeder] talked about the Academy of Sciences and good science. We 
agree. First of all, San Diego has had a problem with effluent sewage. 
The sewage treatment is actually treated, and then we want to put it 4 
miles out to sea, but the EPA, which a rule was written for the Clean 
Water Act, was written, ``If you dump that sewage into a river or a 
lake.'' The Academy of Sciences and Scripps Oceanographic said it 
actually enhances the ocean, but yet the EPA is unwilling to bend, and 
what we are trying to do is, when we talk about risk assessment and 
fairness, is to look because what it would do is cost the city of San 
Diego between $8 to $12 billion. That is $12 billion we do not have for 
law enforcement, or housing, or education and those kinds of things, 
but yet science says that we do not have to double-treat the sewage. It 
is treated in the first place, but we do not have to do secondary 
sewage. That is reasonable.
  When we take a look at it, when we need to move ahead, a company near 
my district named Micogen has a chemical. It is not actually a 
chemical, but it is an insecticide type that is created out of DNA, 
and, when they use that, the actual farmers would grow their material 
or spray it over their crops, and it is not a toxic pesticide that run 
off into our lakes, and rivers and oceans. That is what we need to 
support as far as good science. But yet the administration has put a 
burden on our biotech industry in California. Those are the things we 
need to move ahead with.
  The EPA, Endangered Species, Clean Water, Clean Air were all written 
with good intentions, but there are special interests on both sides of 
this area, those that do want to pollute and those that want to use it 
as a weapon for no growth at all. What the legislation that the 
Republican Party is coming up with is a commonsense application and 
suits neither one. Take a look at the issues that burden us every day. 
Look at the EPA and Endangered Species. I think we can work on a more 
bipartisan area.
  Mr. BEILENSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York [Mrs.  Maloney].
  Mrs. MALONEY. Mr. Speaker, I support the rule.
  The new majority has a case of special interest amnesia.
  The special interests and polluters claim they are overregulated.
  So the new majority is forgetting the days when our rivers burned, 
when fish and wildlife floated dead in our lakes and streams, and when 
our drinking water was in imminent danger of contamination.
  The Clean Water Act remedied that situation.
  Now, the new majority wants to gut the Clean Water Act.
  The New York City water supply needs no additional purification, 
thanks to safeguards in the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking 
Water.
  Weakened standards on pollution runoff under this bill will severely 
jeopardize the city's drinking water and our rivers and lakes.
  So will loosened restrictions on sewage treatment plants that operate 
in watershed areas.
  When is the new majority going to realize that some government 
regulations actually do some good?
  This time, they are not just throwing the baby out with the 
bathwater.
  They are throwing out the drinking water, too.
  I implore my colleagues to think about what we drink and to reject 
this Dirty Water Act.
  Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the rule. I urge the passage of 
the bill. Amendments to the Clean Water Act are long overdue. I urge 
the Members of this body to adopt the rule, and pass the bill, and go 
forward with this legislation which is so badly needed.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. QUILLEN. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. BOEHLERT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that the 
substitute, the alternative that will be advanced by my colleagues, the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton], the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. 
Roemer], and I, 70 percent of our alternative is identical to the 
committee bill. So there is much to be said for a number of provisions 
in the committee bill that address some problems that concern us all. 
We are focusing narrowly on those areas that need the most attention to 
preserve, and protect and enhance our Nation's waterways.
  Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I 
move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Wicker). The question is the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not 
present.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 414, 
nays 4, not voting 16, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 311]

                               YEAS--414

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Allard
     Andrews
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baesler
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Baldacci
     Ballenger
     Barcia
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Barrett (WI)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bereuter
     Berman
     Bevill
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonior
     Bono
     Borski
     Boucher
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bryant (TX)
     Bunn
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chapman
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clinger
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Coburn
     Coleman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (MI)
     Combest
     Condit
     Conyers
     Cooley
     Costello
     Cox
     Coyne
     Cramer
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Danner
     Davis
     de la Garza
     Deal
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Dicks
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Ensign
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Everett
     Ewing
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fawell
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Fields (TX)
     Filner
     Flake
     Flanagan
     Foglietta
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Frank (MA)
     Franks (CT)
     Franks (NJ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Frost
     Funderburk
     Furse
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gejdenson
     Gekas
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Gonzalez
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Gordon
     Goss
     Green
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall (OH)
     Hall (TX)
     Hamilton
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Harman
     Hastert
     Hastings (FL)
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hefner
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Holden
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Istook
     Jackson-Lee
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Johnston
     Jones
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Kleczka
     Klink
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaFalce
     LaHood
     Lantos
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Lipinski
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Longley
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Martinez
     Martini
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McDermott
     McHale
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mfume
     Mica
     Miller (CA)
     Miller (FL)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Molinari
     Mollohan
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Moran
     Morella
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nadler
     [[Page H4690]] Neal
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Oxley
     Packard
     Pallone
     Parker
     Pastor
     Paxon
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Peterson (MN)
     Petri
     Pickett
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Poshard
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Reed
     Regula
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Riggs
     Rivers
     Roberts
     Roemer
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rose
     Roth
     Roukema
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Rush
     Sabo
     Salmon
     Sanders
     Sanford
     Sawyer
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Schumer
     Scott
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skeen
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Stockman
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stump
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Tejeda
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thornberry
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Torres
     Torricelli
     Towns
     Traficant
     Tucker
     Upton
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Williams
     Wilson
     Wise
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                                NAYS--4

     Dingell
     Jefferson
     Schroeder
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Bliley
     Bunning
     Cardin
     Collins (IL)
     Ford
     Graham
     Lewis (KY)
     Lincoln
     Moakley
     Murtha
     Pelosi
     Peterson (FL)
     Rogers
     Talent
     Waxman
     White

                              {time}  1316

  Mr. HILLEARY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  

                          ____________________