as I indicated yesterday in remarks following an extensive comment by our sometime President pro tempore, our revered Senator from West Virginia, the Senator from Delaware and I would have to oppose all amendments. Whatever their good intentions or sound assertions, they would simply have the effect of costing us this epic and fundamentally important measure. I will just say one thing about clean coal. It is remarkable how much progress has been made in our time. I can recall, as a graduate student after returning from the Navy, I received a Fulbright fellowship to the London School of Economics. The clean air technology was so bad in Britain that there would be days, theoretically full daylight, in which the buses would be preceded by busmen carrying electric lights to show them their way through the streets of London. It was darkness at noon in the most extraordinary way. I visited what was then Peking, in our usage, in 1975. The air was not breathable. At that time, or just previously, the Mao government put out large matters about biological warfare by the United States which required the citizens to wear white masks during the day. Certainly it wasn't biological warfare; it was the air quality. It is not what it should be today. It is vastly better than what it was, and it will be vastly better yet as economic development proceeds. So with a measure of regret and great respect, I have to urge our Members to vote against this otherwise admirable amendment.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of clean coal technology and opposing amendments during Senate debate.
Share
More from Patrick Moynihan
Since the 1930s, section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and the Smoot-Hawley tariff, has made it illegal to send prison labor products to this country. If it still continues to be done, doesn't that problem involve our vigilance? Shouldn't…
I know Senator Roth will join me in expressing great gratitude and appreciation for Senator Warner's characteristic generosity. It comes from the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, which is doubly important. Mr. President, we are…
in April, 1808, Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin proposed to the Senate a national system of roads and canals, an idea feasible because payment of the National debt was within reach. It was a time for thinking big. A canal between…
That would be four months ago, in mid-May. There has been plenty of time to examine it. The House bill has a few additional features we find attractive and which we think we could adopt and send right to the President who would sign it. It…





