Max Baucus: “I do think it is important to point out that this is a gutting amendment. Why do I say that? I say that because, first…”

“I do think it is important to point out that this is a gutting amendment. Why do I say that? I say that because, first of all, there are not very many EPA inspectors. The enforcement personnel are pretty thin, and there are not going to be a lot of cases when EPA is coming into a community or the U.S. attorney's office, or whatever, on an enforcement action. We know that in the real world 99 percent of the time whenever there is a difference between, say, a potential law enforcement officer and, in this case, a community, things get worked out; they get resolved in one way or another, and the actual action is not really filed. In those few instances where a community, for some reason, whatever reason, decides it does not want to comply with the standard--and there could be all kinds of reasons--and in those few instances where it decides it does not want to comply with a Federal standard, essentially, the EPA is precluded from enforcing it. Why? Because as I read this amendment, that community, subdivision, could say, well, there is not a total funding from Uncle Sam for this requirement; they are one penny short. Therefore, no enforcement action, none, zero. One penny short. How easily can a community find that it is one penny short?”