I strongly recommend that my colleagues take the time to read this piece because it directly relates to the risk assessment and cost- benefit amendment that I plan to offer when the Safe Drinking Water bill reaches the floor. Mr. Samuelson tells of how we are hounded about psycho-facts that create fears about rising crime, increasing health hazards, falling living standards, and a worsening environment, that are not supported by hard evidence. As many of you know, one of the purposes of my amendment is to get the facts out about the environmental risks that we face, and to put those risks in perspective. And that means comparing the risks that EPA regulates to other risks that we face in our daily lives. Mr. Samuelson speaks eloquently to that same point, and includes a table showing the likelihood of dying from a variety of risks. I am confident that my colleagues will find his piece informative.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of an article related to risk assessment in the Safe Drinking Water bill.
Share
More from John Johnston
All I am saying, I think that is entirely correct, and ours allows that. The difference is ours is limited to $75, yours is unlimited, except yours is close personal friend. All I am saying is that the Senator from Minnesota, in quavering…
would the Senator not agree with me that when on page 36 it defines ``gift'' as including a charitable contribution made on the basis of a designation, recommendation, or other specification made to a lobbyist or foreign agent by a Member…
I rise in strong support of the bill and in opposition, reluctant opposition, to the amendment of my friend from Wyoming. As I said this morning, his point, which is that the National Park Service is underfunded at this time, is a very…
Let me ask the Senator, if what you say is true that 99.999 percent of the people in the country think ``these trips,'' you have in mind some trips other than what I have in mind----





