August 24, 1967
Page 23865
FALSE ECONOMY IN THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL BUDGET
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, on August 15 the Evening Star published an excellent editorial urging the Senate Committee on Appropriations to vote to appropriate $450 million this year for the sewage treatment construction grants program as authorized by the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966.
If we are to carry on the enormous task of cleaning up our Nation's rivers and streams, the Federal Government must live up to its commitment to the State by providing the full authorization. The distinguished Senator from Delaware [Mr. BOGGS], the ranking Republican member of the Subcommittee on Air and Water Pollution, and I have urged the Appropriations Committee to recommend the full $450 million. We have pledged to do everything possible to insure that this Federal commitment is fulfilled. As the Star editorial points out, the Nation can ill afford the kind of false economy which the administration's budget request represents.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the editorial be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
FALSE ECONOMY
In 1966, Congress reacted to the deplorable state of the nation's rivers by passing the Clean Water Restoration Act. Among the act's principal features was the authorization of $450 million in federal aid for municipal sewage treatment facilities.
The purpose in offering federal matching funds was to stimulate the states to contribute financially to the construction of plants. And the concept that cities, the states and the federal government should pool their resources in tackling what is, in fact, a local, state and national problem was a sound one.
But now that the time has come to fork up the money, the administration and the Congress seem to be about to snatch away the tempting carrot of federal participation.
The economy-conscious administration, looking for trimmable material in the budget, sliced the authorization roughly in half, asking for a $203 million appropriation. The House, presumably also aware that rivers don't vote, went along with the administration cut.
The matter is now before the Senate's Public Works Subcommittee. We would urge the Senate to take a careful look at the sorry condition of so many of the nation's once beautiful rivers and streams before they sharpen their own budget-cutting knives. If the fine promise of the Clean Water Restoration Act is not to die in its infancy, then the states and the cities must be convinced that the federal government will indeed put its money where its mouth is.