Barbara Boxer

The full consequences of a default or even the serious prospect of a default by the United States are impossible to predict and awesome to contemplate.

Yesterday, your colleagues in the wonderful Federal Government submitted--Senator Barbara Boxer and Senator Murkowski--it was late yesterday--and Senator Murray from Washington introduced the After School for America's Children Act.

The question is at what level.

The National Toxicology Program... found that chromium-6 in drinking water caused cancer in the studies of animals.

I thank you for bringing it up.

Well, good luck with that theory, because you ought to talk to some people who had exposure who don't feel that way.

I do support that chromium needs to be regulated based on the occupational exposures that are so well characterized in the literature.

It just doesn't add up, when you look at the rates of cancer out there.

We are going to be conservative when we set these standards, and we are going to look to see how we can protect the most vulnerable.

Do you agree that there should be a limit on chromium in drinking water?

Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning, and I am happy to answer any questions.

The EPA's draft assessment on chromium-6 has found that this toxic heavy metal is 'likely to be carcinogenic to humans when consumed in water.'

I don't make money on any side of this thing. I am trying to protect the public, OK?

I applaud the EPA for your response, which is, we hear you.

And you are going to make it public, and it will be transparent.

I am going to be watching very carefully to make sure that we don't get caught up in politics or anything else.

Everyone has a right to clean and safe drinking water, and it is essential to the health of our children and our families that drinking water be free from harmful chemicals and pollutants.

This is so critical, because we have a responsibility to them.

The EPA is going to develop these criteria?

We need to have pure science. And that is what I am for, pure science.

I strongly support Administrator Jackson's decision.

It is my understanding that the authorization provided for under this resolution would expire 1 year after its enactment; is that correct?

I have two more questions. If the President decides to change the mission and order the use of U.S. ground forces for reasons other than the circumstances previously mentioned, does the chairman agree that nothing in this resolution would…

I thank the Senator. I also wish to ask this: Although there is no authorization in this resolution for the use of ground forces in Libya, for which I am pleased, are there any circumstances where ground forces could be deployed?

Building on that, isn't it true that the NRC--as we have learned by reading their founding documents--is an independent commission; isn't that a fact?