David Cay Johnston

The answer is we took care of whatever ambiguity there was at the behest of the Senator from Michigan. You will recall our negotiation on this, and we added quantifiable and nonquantifiable to the definition of benefit in section 621.

One final short question. I ask my friend to read the Secretary's letter. It pertains only to risk assessment, which, as I say, is contained in the Glenn-Daschle bill. That is all he talks about. He does not talk about the exception. I…

The answer to his question is, if it is parts per million of a toxic substance, therefore it relates to benefits to health or to the environment and, therefore, is specifically covered under the phrase that says where nonquantifiable…

The answer is that they could, because those parts per million would relate to a benefit to health or the environment and, therefore, would be a nonquantifiable benefit to health or the environment.

It is maximum achievable controlled technology, which is not stated in parts per million. There are other standards. For example, there are radiation standards that do specify so many rems or millirems per year, et cetera. The Clean Air…

I will answer the question like this. I do not care how many Cabinet people say this thing is ambiguous. It is not. It is as clear as the English language can be. Now, whether they are ingenuous or disingenuous in their criticism, I do not…

On this particular issue, let me--the point is the fact that they have said it does not make it so. I believe it is clear. Now, what I believe also is that this language would really put an ambiguity into it because in the event of a…

just very briefly, one of the biggest fights we have had about this bill--and make no mistake, it has been a fight--is about the question of supermandates; that is, whether this bill supersedes the underlying bill such as the Clean Air…

If the phraseology of the statute is ``at least,'' then that in turn would give discretion to the agency head.

if I may reclaim the time for just a minute, it is irrelevant what the House wanted or what they wanted on the initial bill. I wanted no supermandate. The point is, what does the language say? Mr. President, I have been telling my…

I would like to see that because we have talked about these hypothetical clashes. You see, in your hypothetical, the benefits justified the cost, because in the first instance you saved lives----

Yes, but you see, all of those costs, whether quantifiable or nonquantifiable in the first instance, to determine whether the benefits justify the cost, were taken into consideration. So I ask under your hypothetical, are you telling me…

I ask my friend, would he not agree that benefits to health, safety, or the environment are by their nature nonquantifiable; human life, health, clean air?

If the underlying law says that, if applying the statutory requirements upon which the rule is based, the underlying law that requires the mammography, let us say, a rule cannot satisfy that criteria of subsection (b)--subsection (b)…

Here is what would happen. Within 1 year after the passage of this act, the head of each of the agencies shall look at all the rules under their supervision, determine which ones need to be looked at, and therefore come up with a…

the trigger for a major rule reevaluation was begun in the Ford administration at $100 million. If we use that same amount today in value, $100 million in the Ford administration would now be worth $252 million, and in the Carter…

Now, if I may ask the Senator this. The Senator said that under S. 343 rules automatically sunset. Now, two questions: First, is he not aware that in S. 343 we now provide--this has been added since it originally started--that any…

If you would just leave out that ``in the event of conflict,'' because there is no conflict. That is why we say it shall supplement and not supersede, because we have written it in such a way that it does not conflict and we do not want…

Under the definition of benefits, we have already included the quantifiable benefits. That is put into your cost-benefit ratio. This says that this is a little extra that you are able to add. If you are not able to quantify the value of…

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…

At the end of the 5-year period, it would sunset. Keep in mind that it did not get on the schedule and that the person at the agency was in charge of the schedule, and so he or she could advance the rule as quickly as he could. Would the…

I think the Glenn bill is ambiguous on that question. I do not believe S. 343 is in its present form. We will debate that at a separate time. I am simply saying that the Glenn bill is subject to the same thing on peer review that he says…

Do I misread this when he says in the last paragraph on the first page that ``S. 343 would significantly delay this essential reform by requiring USDA to establish a peer review panel which satisfies the criteria in S. 343, submit a…

Did the bill which the Senator has touted that came out of committee by, I think, a unanimous vote, not provide for a sunset of all bills with no extension at the end of 10 years on the sunset provisions?

The Senator, my friend from Connecticut, is one of the best lawyers in this body, and I consider him to be one of the best lawyers in the country. It is for that reason that I ask him, on page 25 of the bill, it contains language that…