9 



Mr. Hughes. Mr. Chairman, I would defer to any questions any 

 member might have for the Senator before he leaves. 

 Mr. Ortiz. Mr. Castle. 



Mr. Castle. I don't know if this is an appropriate question. Just 

 a quick question, Senator. And this is something I don't know for a 

 fact, but I understand this piece of legislation has passed in the 

 exact form, or a very similar form, the last two years and not been 

 acted on in the Senate. 



Is there anything that should be done differently in the legisla- 

 tion to have it considered in the Senate or can you share with us if 

 the chemistry in the Senate is different this year? I have no idea 

 what happens in the House, so if you can't answer that question, I 

 understand that. 



Senator Lautenberg. I can answer it. It is not the chemistry of 

 the water that is holding this back. It is the chemistry of some of 

 those who are afraid to step out and say, "I am willing to declare 

 that these waters are safe for our citizens." 



It is believed by some that putting your head, to use the expres- 

 sion, in the sand is the way to deal with this problem. But I can 

 assure all of those doubters, that if the people have an understand- 

 ing of what there is in the water, they will come and they will 

 come in droves, if they know that the State is honest with them in 

 working to clean it up. That is why New Jersey's beaches and Dela- 

 ware's beaches are so popular. People have a sense that there is no 

 junk that they ought to be aware of and there is no bacteria that 

 are going to make them sick. 

 Mr. Castle. Thank you, sir. 



Mr. Ortiz. Do we have any other questions from the Members? 

 The gentlewoman. 

 Ms. EsHOO. From California. 

 Mr. Ortiz. That is right. 

 Ms. EsHOO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Senator, I would like to commend you and your House counter- 

 part, Mr. Hughes, for stepping out and authoring this legislation. It 

 is, in my view, highly meritorious. Having come from local govern- 

 ment and as a Californian, what I would like to maybe zero in on 

 for a moment is the cost. Coming from a State that has an 840-mile 

 long magnificent coastline, and our struggles to protect it, I am 

 mindful there is less than $3 million for coastal zone management 

 in California, per the mandate of the Congress, to not only oversee 

 that States oversee that program, but the resources are next to 

 nothing. 



Of the money that would accompany this bill, do you feel that 

 this is actually feasible, so that it would not only complement the 

 smaller States but take into consideration what the task, what the 

 undertaking of the State of California would be? 



Senator Lautenberg. I am reminded by my distinguished friend 

 and colleague. Bill Hughes, who has been involved in protecting 

 coastal waters for almost all of his years here, that presently in the 

 State of California, $650,000 per year is being spent in simply six 

 counties on the coast. We, as I mentioned earlier, spend $200,000 a 

 year monitoring these waters for a tourist business of about $9.5 

 billion. So I think the costs relative to the benefit are really de 

 minimis. 



