Government, business, and industry in our country spent approximately $115 billion for pollution control in 1990, and it is estimated that the figure will increase to $185 billion per year--that is 2.3 percent of our gross national product--by the year 2000. EPA continues to implement, I think, overly burdensome regulations while the Government continues to talk about creating jobs. The tragedy is aggravated by the fact that we often know so little about the benefits of regulation. Regulations often are based upon inadequate scientific analysis or fail to assess the minuscule risks being addressed compared to the enormous costs of reducing risks. I do not know how many of you saw a Washington Post article, I think it was yesterday. It covered a statement by the EPA. One of the EPA water quality rules allows arsenic levels no more than 2 or 3 parts per billion.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the costs and benefits of environmental regulations during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Frank Murkowski
in Alaska, the problem is clear. Residents of rural villages in Alaska do not have either adequate drinking water or human sanitation facilities in their homes and communities. As a result, sickness and disease, comparable to many Third…
I believe these two pieces of legislation are in the best interest of the native corporations, the Alaska communities where the watersheds are located, and the Federal government.
Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the second of two bills of which passed the Senate last year with unanimous consent.
I rise this morning to speak about a particular provision of that bill, section 531. Section 531 is an important statement of United States policy toward our friends in Taiwan. Madam President, back in July of last year, I added an…





