30850 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE November 3,1983 opening up a 4 million ton hazardous through its associations support my ministration but not this one. They waste loophole. This body decided on amendment because they think my have confidence in their regulators, the 4th of August by a substantial amendment is in the interest of small their bureaucrats. I contend they are margin to reject that loophole. business. My amendment is supported the same no matter who is in the An act of Congress does not weaken by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, White House, and we have argued the toxicity of anyone's waste. We the National Federation of Independ- about that before. would love to legislate away PCB's or ent Business, the National Association But I am concerned about these reg- vinyl chloride or trichloroethylene or of Manufacturers, the American Tex- ulators at EPA and, as a matter of any one of the other serious cancer- tile Manufacturers Institute, the Na- fact, they will continue on the same causing agents, but we cannot do it. If tional Automobile Dealers Association, track no matter who is in the Office of we could do it, we would. the Synthetic Organic Chemical Man- President. The legislative veto is What we are witnessing here is ufacturers, the National Association of bigger than this particular incident really a second bite at the apple. Not Furniture Manufacturers, the Printing and issue, which I think is very impor- only do we run the risk of making it Industries of America, and others. tant. more difficult for small business The second point I want to make is I would like to talk about what is people to live in a predictable environ- that it is very clear that my amend- going to happen in the Judiciary Com- ment but we give to those who have an ment would in no way prohibit the mittee and in the Rules Committee. As economic incentive to pollute our com- regulation of small generators in the a matter of fact, last session of Con- munities a greater opportunity to do disposal of hazardous wastes. It will gress, the last Congress we did have a so. not contribute to a public health prob- regulatory reform bill reported out of What does that mean? It means that lem. the Judiciary Committee and it lan- once again those who will pollute our Not only are there the hammer pro- guished until the end of the Congress neighborhoods will profit from inac- visions which would regulate small in the Rules Committee. And I might tion. They will profit from inaction by business, but I think it is quite clear there would be regulation that is ap- add, many of the provisions included encouraging the stymieing of the legis- in this Levitas amendment here were lative process that we have experi- propriate for the small generator with my amendment. It would not do away in that bill. enced with the funeral rule, with As far as what is going to happen in stockbrokers, with used cars, and with with regulation over this group alto- gether. the Rules Committee, ladies and gen- immigration legislation, simply be- tlemen, I do not want to prejudge. But cause the polluters are given a chance Mr. ECKART. I appreciate the gen- tleman's expression of concern and I having been there for several years, I to paralyze this Congress, and the con- can tell you there is no predisposition sequences of that paralysis is either a thank him for granting me the extra time. to get such a legislative veto bill out of change of rules or continued pollution. the Rules Committee, even after I am a supporter of the gentleman's Mr. Chairman, I yield back the bal- for the ance of my time. Chadha. regulatory reform legislation So I think this is a well thought-out very simple reason that I do not want Mr. LOTT. Mr. Chairman, I move to a patchwork quilt that draws a single strike the requisite number of words, provision. I would like to ask the gen- set of standards for an individual and I rise in support of the amend- tleman from Georgia a couple of ques- agency and changes those standards ment. tions, if I could. based on the whim or will of the Con- Mr. Chairman, I am amazed at those First, are you absolutely convinced- gress at the time that we are debating who do not trust the Congress appar- as much as you can be-that this does a particular piece of legislation. ently to retain the ultimate control comply, and have you had legal coun- What I think we need to do is to get over our constitutional lawmaking re- sel that says that this complies with the gentleman's bill out of the Rules sponsibilities. And make no mistake the provisions of what we should do in Committee, and I have cosigned your about it, rulemaking is lawmaking. the Congress as far as the President's letters and cosponsored your bill so As I understand it, the Levitas role and the way we proceed with con- that there will be a single uniform amendment does not do away with stitutional requirements? standard that deals with the entire that agreement reached earlier. It just Mr. LEVITAS. Will the gentleman regulatory process in the same way. gives the Congress an opportunity to yield? remain in the loop. It gives the small Mr. LOTT. I will be glad to yield. O 1740 businesses an opportunity, if they are Mr. LEVITAS. I can tell the gentle- The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The dealt with by the regulators in an man we have been assured both by the time of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. unfair rule that treats them just like Justice Department and by the Li- ECKART) has expired. big businesses, that they have an op- brary of Congress that this is fully (On request of Mr. LEVITAS and by portunity to have their case made consistent with the decision in the unanimous consent Mr. ECKART was al- again or to be considered by the Con- Chadha case. lowed to proceed for 2 additional min- gress. Mr. LOTT. Does the gentleman's utes.) So I do think that the amendment amendment in any way eliminate the Mr. ECKART. The gentleman has by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. language in the bill dealing with small raised a fundamental question here. I LEVITAS) is a good amendment and we quantity generator waste rules? think it would be in the Nation's inter- should support it on its merits. Mr. LEVITAS. If the gentleman will est and in the interest of my friend if But I really want to speak more to yield further, absolutely not. I tried to we used the leverage that this legisla- the legislative veto side of this thing. I make that point very clear. tion will create for us to bring about a want to emphasize that, as I under- We, in fact, will have regulation. meaningful regulatory reform bill. stand it, the Congressional Research This would simply make certain that Mr. LEVITAS. Mr. Chairman, will Service, American Law Division, has the regulation is a reasonable regula- the gentleman yield? said that a joint resolution of approval tion for small generators. Mr. ECKART. I am happy to yield. would be constitutional and we also Mr. LOTT. Was congressional review Mr. LEVITAS. I thank the gentle- have that indication from the Justice a part of the bill that was reported by man for yielding. Department. the Judiciary Committee last year and First let me say that while I respect There are those here and in the ad- languished endlessly in the Rules the gentleman's right to his opinion as ministration, quite honestly, that Committee? to what serves the best interests of oppose this provision. This administra- Mr. LEVITAS. The congressional small business, I would call to the gen- tion, the previous administration, review provisions were precisely at the tleman's attention that small business always want to apply it to the next ad- heart of the legislation that never November 3,1983 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 30851 made it out of the Rules Committee. twice. We would have had to go lations are consistent with what the And I might add this, that with all of through a doubletrack system for Congress has passed. the effort that my good friend from every measure requiring regulations: Texas will put into regulatory reform First the bill itself, then the regula- O 1750 in the Judiciary Committee this time, tion. And the question I would address to if I had to guess, there will be no regu- We came up with a better way, final- my very good friend from Wisconsin is latory reform bill reported even out of ly, and that was to give each House a this: Why should you, as an elected the Judiciary Committee in this Con- time certain during which it could Member of the Congress of the United gress. review-the committees of authority- States, not make the decision as to Mr. LOTT. How long have we been could review specific proposed regula- whether a particular regulation that waiting on regulatory reform legisla- tions. If they interposed no objection, will cost the American people $100 tion? then the regulations would go into million goes into effect? Why should Mr. LEVITAS. My recollection is effect. So each House of the legisla- you pass that decision to someone who about 61/2 years now, and in terms of tion had a window of time to react to has never suffered the inconvenience legislative veto almost 9 years.