There is no slippery slope. What it says is those that have proven scientifically there is no reasonable reason to think there is environmental damage that is going to occur should not have to go through a process of having to go through EPA and the Federal bureaucracy. I think you would agree if we in the 1970's were told by scientists there is no foreseeable damage or foreseeable problem with water quality, this law would never have been passed. In San Diego the scientists have said that, and I think you need to reflect it.
Brian Bilbray: “There is no slippery slope. What it says is those that have proven scientifically there is no reasonable reason to think…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing environmental regulations and scientific assessments of water quality.
Share
More from Brian Bilbray
I think history has proven that because Congress pushed it, made them look at new technology, it was aligned.
There are changes need to be made, and reform is not a bad word in a lot of episodes.
This is a very simple amendment. It just says you will not use Federal funds to tear down the war memorial on Mount Soledad. It is very simple. It is basically a war memorial that was originally built in honor of the veterans of Korea. Mr…
Mr. Bunker, I think you and everybody else that's required to enforce either a law or regulation understands that when the Legislature passes a law, there's always the assumption of discretionary enforcement.





