17 



Now, why do I say that? This is the fourth Congress, fourth 

 straight Congress, to consider legislation that would elevate EPA to 

 Cabinet rank, and we have all been around here during this period. 

 I can remember going down to the White House, I believe you were 

 there, with the President. I guess it was early in President Bush's 

 term when he said, "Let's get going on this," and there seemed to 

 be great agreement, but problems occurred. 



Now, what happened to the previous attempts? It seems to me 

 that the stumbling block, as Senator Durenberger mentioned, has 

 been the other issues, whether it is global warming or private prop- 

 erty rights or Government ethics. AH those were loaded onto the 

 bill. I do not think that just because a bill passed the Senate last 

 year that we should believe that the same bill will pass the Senate 

 quickly this year. And even if it does pass the Senate this year, the 

 same bill that passed last year, I think it is important to remember 

 that that bill did not become law. The House refused to consider it. 



We all want the bill to reach the President's desk, so my urging 

 is to report a clean bill that leaves these other issues that are not 

 directly involved with the Cabinet status to a later time. If the bill 

 reported from this Committee is more than a simple elevation of 

 EPA, there is clearly going to be a temptation on the Senate floor 

 to turn it into an environmental Christmas tree. 



For example, I know, as it is said sometimes, there is lying in the 

 weeds out there an effort to attach legislation forbidding so-called 

 takings without compensation. Now, that is an issue we have wres- 

 tled with before, but if that is on this legislation, certainly if it is 

 attempted to be put on, that is going to bog down this legislation. 

 There will be very strong objections to that. 



So I also urge that the President be allowed maximum flexibility 

 to organize and reorganize the priorities of the department as the 

 needs and priorities of the Nation demand. I do not think we ought 

 to write into law each and every office within the agency. 



Now, one issue that has arisen, as Senator Durenberger men- 

 tioned, is the future of the Council on Environmental Quality, 

 CEQ. President Clinton has suggested that it be abolished and re- 

 placed with a White House office. Now, that is going to require 

 amendments to the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 

 1970, legislation that falls under the jurisdiction of the Committee 

 on Environment and Public Works. The proposal raises several 

 questions that have yet to be answered. That is, the President's 

 proposal. 



In the interests of moving the EPA bill along quickly, I suggest 

 that your Committee report a clean elevation bill and leave the 

 CEQ issue to be dealt with by the Environment and Public Works 

 Committee. 



As a member of that Committee, as the ranking member, I 

 pledge to work with President Clinton and with Vice President 

 Grore on the future of CEQ. But please, let us not hold up Environ- 

 mental Protection Agency Cabinet status while we work on the 

 CEQ issue. 



One final point, Mr. Chairman. I urge that the concept of protec- 

 tion be kept in the title of the department. I doubt that all of us 

 here could reach a quick agreement on the meaningful missions of 

 this new department, but surely we can agree that protecting the 



