Let me tell you why. When you go to (c), then you cannot satisfy your benefits justifying the cost. But the statute required you to do something. And so you are required to go ahead and do what the statute says, notwithstanding that the benefits did not justify the cost. Keep in mind that those benefits included all of your quantifiable as well as nonquantifiable benefits.
Discussing the requirements of a statute related to cost and benefits.
Share
More from David Cay Johnston
This is sort of a version 2 of the Wellstone amendment, in that it seeks to take the rights of utilities and, secondarily, the rights of ratepayers of utilities, and abolish those by legislative fiat--which simply cannot be done. The…
Mr. President, what the Senator is saying is so illogical. We have established that the Federal Government has the duty to dispose of spent nuclear fuel, and the Senator is saying that that duty carries with it no responsibility to pay…
I simply rise in support of the position of the Senator from New Mexico. I was here several years ago speaking in favor of the continuation of the testing program, because I thought it was important for both reliability and safety. The…
Let us take this one at a time. You agree with me the Government has no right to take away vested rights, and would be liable for the violation?
Other voices in this conversation
