18 



environment is among the highest purposes for which this entity 

 would be constituted. I very strongly believe that the legislation 

 that the Senate sends forth should call the new agency the Depart- 

 ment of Environmental Protection, not just the Department of En- 

 vironment. 



Twenty years ago, Mr. Chairman, we undertook a new and diffi- 

 cult challenge as a Nation. We knew that life and its most enrich- 

 ing experiences could only be sustained by careful stewardship of 

 our natural environment, so we turned to Government to do this, 

 principally through the laws that are now administered by EPA. 



These laws have been effective. I think there is a very, very out- 

 standing record that has been achieved by EPA. The quality of our 

 air and water has improved. Public lands and threatened wildlife 

 resources are being restored. Untold damage has been avoided. I 

 might say, compared to other recent Federal Government efforts, 

 for example the budget process or the war on drugs or the energy 

 policy, compared to those, our laws and programs to protect the en- 

 vironment have been a real success. 



Twenty years ago, environmental protection as a purpose of the 

 Federal Government may have been a radical idea. Today, it is an 

 accomplished fact. I believe we ought to continue to recognize that 

 reality by creating the Department of Environmental Protection. 



Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 



Prepared Statement of Senator Chafee 



Mr. Chairman, Senator Roth and Members of the Committee, I am pleased that 

 you are taking early action on legislation to make EPA a cabinet department. This 

 is an important step. 



Because elevation of EPA to cabinet status is an important step, I urge you to 

 approve legislation that addresses the simple question of converting EPA to a cabi- 

 net department and to avoid the temptation to address other issues. 



This is the fourth straight Congress to consider legislation that would elevate 

 EPA to cabinet rank. Previous attempts have failed because too many other issues . 

 . . global warming, private property rights, government ethics . . . were loaded on to 

 the bill. 



We should not expect that just because a bill passed the Senate last year, the 

 same bill will pass the Senate quickly this year. And even if it could pass the 

 Senate, it is important to remember that the bUl we approved last year did not 

 become law. The House refused to consider it. 



We want this bill to reach the President's desk, so my advice is to report a clean 

 bill that leaves to another time issues that are not directly related to cabinet status. 

 If the bill reported by this Committee is more than a simple elevation of EPA, there 

 will be a temptation on the Senate floor to turn it into an environmental Christmas 

 tree. 



I would also urge that the President be allowed the maximum flexibility to orga- 

 nize and reorganize the Department as the needs and priorities of the Nation 

 demand. We should not write into the law each and every office within the agency. 



One issue that has arisen in the past few days is the future of the Council on 

 Environmental Quality. President Clinton has suggested that CEQ be abolished and 

 replaced with a White House office. That would require amendments to the Envi- 

 ronmental Quality Improvement Act of 1970, legislation that falls under the juris- 

 diction of the Committee on Environment and Public Works. The proposal raises 

 several questions that have yet to be answered. In the interest of moving the EPA 

 bill along quickly, I suggest your committee report a clean elevation bUl and leave 

 the CEQ issues to be dealt with by the Environment and Public Works Committee. 



As the ranking Republican member of the Environment and Public Works Com- 

 mittee, I pledge to work with President Clinton and Vice President Grore on the 

 future of CEQ. Let's not hold up EPA cabinet status while we work out the CEQ 

 issues. 



One final point, Mr. Chairman. I urge you to keep the concept of "protection" in 

 the title of this department. I doubt that we could reach quick agreement on any 



