the amendment has been cleared on this side. It is a good amendment and we are pleased to accept the amendment. As the author of the amendment has indicated, some of us are more susceptible to adverse health effects from drinking water than others. It may be a matter of age or because of a pre-existing illness or a difference in metabolism or because of other factors, but it appears that some Americans are more sensitive--more likely to experience an illness from drinking water contaminants--than others. The Safe Drinking Water Act already allows EPA to consider these differences. For example, EPA has set a standard for nitrate in drinking water designed to protect infants. Children younger than 6 months lack certain enzymes in their digestive system which break down nitrate. As a result the nitrate may enter the bloodstream and interfere with the blood's role in carrying oxygen. The illness is called blue baby disease. An infant with the disease turns blue for the lack of oxygen in the bloodstream. The standard for nitrate set under the Safe Drinking Water Act is established to prevent this adverse effect. It is set to protect this specific subpopulation--children under 6 months of age. So, the law already fully authorizes the Administrator to set regulations intended to protect sensitive subpopulations.
John Chafee: “the amendment has been cleared on this side. It is a good amendment and we are pleased to accept the amendment. As the…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the acceptance of an amendment related to drinking water safety and health effects.
Share
More from John Chafee
As I understand the bill--and I am open to correction on this--what it does is it provides that over the course of 2 years, that is fiscal year 1995, which starts on October 1, and fiscal year 1996, that the bill authorizes some $2.8…
Those are not Democratic ideas. Those were proposed by Republican leadership actually in the Congress at the time.
And the request in the President's budget was $964 million, nearly doubling, a little short of doubling, say some 70 percent increase, perhaps?
I commend the Senator from Idaho for the amendment he has presented. He is truly representing the folks of his State where they do have many, many small water systems. Let me just give you a statistic, if I might. There are 36,000…





