Today my colleagues and I from San Diego introduced a bill to amend the Clean Water Act to allow San Diego to treat its sewage in a cost-effective and environmentally sensitive manner. This has been a long fight for many of us. I have been fighting against nonsensical Fed requirements for more than 6 years. These efforts began when I was a member of the San Diego City Council. During this time, I often found myself on the losing end of 7 to 2 votes--because a majority of my city council did not want to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency. But I was convinced--by my own research and the testimony of scientists from the prestigious Scripps Institution of Oceanography--that San Diego was already doing the right thing for our environment. By 1992, my colleagues on the San Diego City Council came around and agreed with my position--that the requirement to upgrade the Point Loma treatment plant to secondary standards was ridiculous. When I first ran for Congress, I promised to solve this sewage problem. And one of the first bills I introduced as a freshman in the 103d Congress was H.R. 3190, which is very similar to the bill that five of us introduced today. But, unfortunately, here in Congress, I also met with resistance. I was told other cities were required to meet the secondary treatment standards, why should San Diego be treated differently? I made it clear that my bill would in no way compromise the integrity of the Clean Water Act.
Bob Filner: “Today my colleagues and I from San Diego introduced a bill to amend the Clean Water Act to allow San Diego to treat its…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a bill to amend the Clean Water Act for sewage treatment in San Diego.
Share
More from Bob Filner
I certainly thank the members of the committee and Mr. Bilirakis for working in such a bipartisan manner to protect servicemembers and protect veterans. I think Mr. Bilirakis gave a very comprehensive overview of the bill. Let me just make…
I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota, the sergeant major of the United States Congress, Mr. Walz.
On rollcll 598, I was away from the Capitol due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.'' Stated against:
On rollcall 500, I was away from the Capitol due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.'' ____________________





