I appreciate that. If I may just to take this one more step, I referenced that we spoke to different organizations, businesses in the private sector, about this very issue and I would just like to reference a letter from Browning-Ferris Industries. In the letter they state in one of the paragraphs: After reviewing the legislation that will be considered on the floor and after discussions with your office, we recognize that among your objectives for S. 1 is creation of a favorable climate for the private sector. In fact, S. 1 seeks creatively to address a concern expressed in some quarters that unfunded mandates legislation could disadvantage the private sector where public-private competition takes place. With your commitment to assure equality for the private sector--no more but no less--where competition exists between the public and private sectors, we are pleased to strongly support S. 1. Also, from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, reading a portion of that letter, it says: I particularly want to thank you for responding to our concerns about the role of the private sector in this debate and the potential impact it could have had on the business community, especially small businesses.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing support for S. 1 and its impact on the private sector.
Share
More from Dirk Kempthorne
I stand today as the sponsor of Senate Resolution 201 designating May 15, 1998, as National Peace Officers Memorial Day. This is the fifth year in a row that I have sponsored this resolution and I am proud to be joined this year by 62 of…
Simply put, we are in a state of emergency. Whether it be low commodity prices, lack of export markets or too many government restrictions, farmers are facing catastrophes from every angle. If we are truly going to take steps to fix this…
I agree. They object to the scope of the proposed EFH program and are concerned that it will subject activities, including land development, agriculture, water supply, forestry, and mining, to the jurisdiction of the Fishery Management…





