I just say that when language in a bill says any Federal law, it is incumbent upon the author of such language to be specific, to say what those laws are. I do not think that we should ask the public to accept something so broad and sweeping they have no idea of what its implications and what its applications are.
Discussing the need for specificity in federal legislation.
Share
More from James Oberstar
I rise in support of H.R. 5301. This bill extends a provision prohibiting the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and States from requiring permits under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act for certain discharges that are incidental to…
Again, the acquisition of replacement land is available and authorized under OPA 90. What this amendment does is clarify that in that replacement you can replace that part of the ecosystem that has been irresponsibly damaged with better…
Well, it is to replace what has been destroyed. It's really just clarifying what is already available under OPA, but making it clear that the funds can be used for those resources that have been damaged so badly they can't be restored.
A combination of analysis and tests may be used to show that the airplane is capable of being evacuated within 90 seconds...
Other voices in this conversation
