On the recordMarch 7, 2002
This is not the time and the place for a discussion, debate, on things nuclear in the true sense of the word. That time will come. Price-Anderson points up the problems we have with nuclear power. If in fact nuclear power was such a good deal, why does it need a subsidy? Wouldn't any other utility love to have the Federal Government backing its liability? That is, in effect, what Price-Anderson does. Many years ago, when nuclear power was an experiment and was in its infancy, and we, the Government, Congress, the President, decided to give it a shot in the arm to see if it would work, even back then everyone recognized the dangers of nuclear power. We have had since then Three Mile Island and other problems. It was simply a question that they could not get the places insured. We are now told these places are so safe, there is no reason for the subsidy. If these places are so safe, they should be able to buy insurance. If they can't buy insurance, then the amendment I offered should have been followed; that is, there should be real, true accounting in determining liability of these companies. It is clear the nuclear power industry is now a mature electricity industry that no longer needs liability protection.
Source
govinfo.gov




