[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 128 (Tuesday, September 17, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10649-S10650]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          THE RIGHT TO SAY NO

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to make a short statement on my 
strong disappointment that the energy and water conference report does 
not include the Senate-passed amendment giving the States and the 
cities the right to say no to the importation of out-of-State garbage.
  I must say, and I think you remember, Mr. President, this is not a 
new

[[Page S10650]]

issue. This has been around since 1989. Essentially, it is a battle 
between those States who want to export their trash to another State 
and those States on the receiving end who do not want it.
  Not long ago in my State, the city of Miles City faced a prospect 
that was practically a Noah's flood of garbage imports. Fortunately, 
that plan fell through, but the really crazy and humiliating part of it 
all was that the 5,000 citizens of Miles City could only sit and wait. 
They had no say at all and no way to stop the waste from coming in. 
Why? Very simply, because the Supreme Court has struck down attempts by 
States to limit importation of garbage, saying it violates the commerce 
clause of the Constitution. So we in the Congress have to act and pass 
Federal legislation that enables States and enables local communities 
to say no.
  It is obviously wrong, Mr. President. It is unfair for any city, 
whether Miles City or any other city in the United States, to not have 
the right to say no to garbage coming into their State. As you recall, 
we in the Senate have done our part. Way back in May of 1995, we passed 
a bill to let Montana and other States say no to the importation of 
out-of-State garbage. The House of Representatives, however, has a 
different story. They have stalled. They have stalled on any action in 
this measure for a couple of years.
  I say that the people of Montana, the people of Pennsylvania, 
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and other States affected by the deluge of 
garbage coming into their States cannot afford to wait any longer. They 
are anxious. They are concerned. They feel the Government ought to be 
able to do something to address this situation. Some of these States 
are already importing millions of tons of garbage, and they do not want 
to import more.
  Now it appears that New York City may add 10,000 tons or more of 
trash every day--10,000 tons of trash every day--when it closes its 
Fresh Kills landfill on the outskirts of New York City. That should 
drive home to everyone, and especially the House, how important it is 
to act and to act quickly.
  We talk a lot around here about local control, about letting States 
decide their own destiny, letting local communities decide their own 
destiny. By saying no to the Senate amendment on this conference 
report, the House is preventing the people from controlling their own 
destiny. By saying no, States cannot stop out-of-State garbage from 
being dumped in their own backyard.
  Obviously, the Senate bill we passed is not perfect. It is a 
compromise. It is a compromise between the importing States that take 
garbage and do not want the garbage and the exporting States that, 
frankly, want to export more. It is a compromise. It is a compromise we 
can live with.
  Now, the House, apparently, does not want to act. It is not 
compromising. I say the House should pass something which at least they 
think makes sense for them. That way, we can work another compromise 
that is between the House and the Senate, and we can finally solve this 
problem--it is not the perfect way, but in a way that generally 
resolves the problems so that today more local communities can say no 
to the importation of garbage coming into their States. That is only 
fair. I ask the House to act quickly.
  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Campbell). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________