29 



some of the other concerns that have been raised in previous ses- 

 sions. But obviously we are open to any discussions that may be 

 necessary if there is a problem at some point in the future. 



Senator Roth. Well, as you know, the problem in the past has 

 been that by opening it up to other amendments, the bill has ended 

 up going nowhere. 



Ms. Browner. Yes. 



Senator Roth. I think that is the real issue at this time. I am not 

 passing judgment on these other proposals, some of which I may 

 well support, but I am concerned that we are going to end up not 

 succeeding again, and I think that it seems to me that the top pri- 

 ority right now on the part of the Administration, if I may be so 

 bold as to suggest, is to upgrade EPA to Cabinet, then worry about 

 some of these other proposals separately. 



Ms. Browner. Well, as the President has said on several occa- 

 sions and as I think you correctly interpret, he is committed to the 

 elevation of EPA. He agrees and I agree that there are some other 

 issues which could be addressed in a timely manner, it would cer- 

 tainly be helpful and would add to the stature of a new Cabinet 

 agency. 



But we are absolutely willing to work with the members of this 

 Committee and the members of the Senate as the bill advances to 

 do whatever may be necessary to involve ourselves in whatever dis- 

 cussions may be appropriate. 



To go to the comments made by Senator Durenberger earlier, I 

 have every reason to believe that the President will involve himself 

 personally in this effort. He is very, very committed to it and 

 thinks it extremely important. 



Senator Roth. Let me ask one further question; then my time for 

 the first round is up. 



Chairman Glenn. That is all right, use your 6 minutes. 



Senator Roth. You stated during your confirmation hearings 

 that cost-benefit analysis was required by Florida law before any 

 environmental rule could be issued, and that in your experience, 

 such analysis had proven useful to you in performing your duties 

 as head of the Florida Environmental Protection Agency. 



Will you require a similar cost-benefit analysis of the regulations 

 under your control? 



Ms. Browner. Let me speak about my experience in Florida, 

 briefly. I found this type of analysis to be extremely useful. There 

 are requirements, if I understand correctly, in the development of 

 rules in all Federal agencies, to look at economic impacts. I am not 

 sure they are of the same detail and structured in the same way 

 that the Florida requirements are, and I would like to look at that 

 to see if perhaps there are ways we can make the information 

 more usable, more understandable, so that those people actually 

 looking at a rule and seeking to comment on a rule in the proposal 

 stage can fully understand what the economic or potential econom- 

 ic consequences may be. 



Senator Roth. Mr. Chairman, I have to go down to the floor, so I 

 will yield back. 



Chairman Glenn. All right, fine. 



Senator Lieberman. 



