[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 13223]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



               INTRODUCTION OF THE FEDERALISM ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. JAMES P. MORAN

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 16, 1999

  Mr. MORAN of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join my 
colleagues David McIntosh, Tom Davis, Karen McCarthy, Michael Castle 
and Gary Condit, in cosponsoring the Federalism Act of 1999.
  This legislation is a logical and necessary extension of the Unfunded 
Mandate Reform Act that Congress passed in 1995. The Unfunded Mandate 
Reform Act and the Federalism Act we are introducing today, seek to 
protect and enhance our federalism system of government. The process 
and discipline we set forth in the Federalism Act will make federal 
decision makers more sensitive to state and local concerns and 
prerogatives. Passage of this legislation will mark a milestone in 
improvements in our federalism system of government.
  Having served in local government, I know first-hand how even the 
most well-intentioned federal laws and regulations can disrupt state 
and local programs and initiatives. Like the landmark National 
Environmental Policy Act, this legislation establishes a process that 
includes a federalism impact assessment on both the Congress and the 
executive branch to ensure that we make more informed and rational 
decisions on new federal laws and regulations that may affect state and 
local governments.
  I will be the first to admit that much of the legislation Congress 
considers includes some type of federal preemption. I support strong 
national standards for clean air and water, fair labor standards and 
public health. Others in Congress may seek to federalize our criminal 
justice system. All are legitimate preorgatives of the U.S. Congress 
and under the Supremacy Clause.
  I do not suggest we return to the days of the Articles of 
Confederation or endorse State Rights' advocates for a limited federal 
government. What I do suggest is that we establish a procedure to 
ensure that Congress is both well-informed and accountable for major 
actions that preempt state and local governments. We also need to set 
forth a process that provides the courts with greater clarity on 
congressional intent when legal disputes arise between federal and 
state law.
  I know this legislation is not perfect. I look forward to working 
with my colleagues to ensure that this legislation defines the scope of 
judicial review and limits the potential for nuisance lawsuits as well 
as safeguards the rights of Congress to respond promptly to important 
national initiatives.

                          ____________________