September 29, 1999

Mr. Chairman, I speak in strong support of the Towns substitute.

The Subcommittee has a choice before it today. It can choose to address the brownfields issues which are of interest to many members, and other targeted reforms where there is a broad consensus. Or it can follow the path of the Republican amendment in the nature of a substitute, yielding extended debates over taxes, mandatory allocations, rollbacks of cleanup standards, states’ rights, Balanced Budget Act violations, and the shift from polluter pays to paying the polluter. This does nothing to complete cleanup of our Superfund sites, or the redevelopment of brownfields needed by our cities.

The Towns Substitute has brownfields provisions supported by the National Realty Committee, mayors of our major urban centers, including Mayor Archer of Detroit, and our county officials. It also has the strong support of the President of the United States.

Other targeted reforms in the Towns substitute address the liability concerns of municipal governments, small business, and legitimate recyclers. A study of the future revenue needs of the program is directed to be performed by May 1, 2000.

Our choice is between concrete accomplishments and continued controversy and debate.

We must stop holding our communities hostage in the inside-the-beltway poker game that uses brownfields provisions as the "sweetener" for bills like that before the Subcommittee today. The Majority’s bill contains controversial provisions sought only by the special interests that have not yet met their responsibilities to clean up their mess.