We are reading actually from the substitute. In any event, it says, ``reasonably identifiable, significant favorable effects, quantifiable and nonquantifiable, including social and environmental health and economic effects.'' We did not want to go into a laundry list because my friend knows the old rule about specifying one thing excludes those matters not specified. You will remember the old rule from law school. That is the problem here. But it is, I think, really clear. To get back to your question of the underlying statute governing, I insist that it is absolutely clear. Nevertheless, I would recommend to my colleagues a clarification, if the clarification does not inject its own ambiguity.
David Cay Johnston: “We are reading actually from the substitute. In any event, it says, ``reasonably identifiable, significant favorable…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the clarity and implications of a legislative substitute.
Share
More from David Cay Johnston
The Nation has more than three decades of experience transporting both civilian and DOE-owned spent fuel. In 1997, 471 shipments were made, 444 of which were by truck. In the 1980's, 100 to 200 such shipments were typically made each year…
The point is this, though: They have tested it with weapons 30 times bigger than antitank weapons with direct hits. That caused a breach. Only a third of an ounce comes out. There are many, many much more lucrative targets, by orders of…
Donald has a long history of, you know, cheating, lying under oath, presenting false documents.
The University of New Orleans has developed an entrepreneurship program designed not only to assist in the development of skills, but also to assist in the creating of individual, family, and small businesses in our inner cities. The two…





