Charles Norwood: “Mr. Chairman, I claim part of the time in opposition due to the fact that there is not enough time to discuss this very…”

“Mr. Chairman, I claim part of the time in opposition due to the fact that there is not enough time to discuss this very important issue, but I support the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis). We need to grant the ombudsmen subpoena power. We need to grant the ombudsmen subpoena power because there are some grave injustices being committed at the EPA, oftentimes with inadequate and bogus science. The EPA needs to be held accountable to the people that they were created to protect. For my fellow Members who may not be familiar with this situation, the EPA Ombudsman's office is or should be a final remedy within the EPA for anyone with a dispute or grievance with that agency. We all want to hold lawsuits to a minimum, particularly when taxpayer dollars are involved. In numerous other fields, this body has encouraged arbitration in lieu of litigation as a tried and true method of holding down court costs while still protecting the consumers. It also opens up the crowded court dockets, frankly, for cases that truly need to be in court. This is the purpose of the EPA Ombudsman's office. There is, however, a very large problem with how the program is currently being operated. Current funding has allowed only two arbitrators for the entire country, two for the entire country. Those two officials have no binding legal authority to conduct any real investigation into a complaint.”