Certainly. So they say that because you goofed, we are going to take it upon ourselves to vastly reduce the mandate, no matter how critical it might be--it might be asbestos, water well pollution, or whatever, and they can say we are going to either severely reduce the requirement on the cities, counties, and States, or, two, we are negating the mandate. Now you are giving them an option, Senator. Even though we may have appropriated $90 million, to say that is not enough to get the water hot, so we are negating the entire mandate. Is that a fair reading of it?
Dale Bumpers: “Certainly. So they say that because you goofed, we are going to take it upon ourselves to vastly reduce the mandate, no…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of reducing federal mandates related to environmental regulations.
Share
More from Dale Bumpers
This is an amendment that provides, from available funds in the bill, $433,000 can be used to complete construction of the Alderson Plant Materials Center in Alderson, WV.
I must say, his determination--his fierce determination--to get this bill passed was reflected in the fact that he asked me every day for 6 months when I was going to take my hold off. This morning, I was very happy to tell him that my…
I noticed there was no prompt response on that side of the aisle to a request for the yeas and nays, so I assumed some sort of cabal was in the works.
Yes, Senator Johnson, I do have some concerns about the amendment. However, I am prepared to accept the amendment today if I can secure a commitment from the Senator from South Dakota to sit down and address my concerns between passage of…





