June 9, 1977
Page 18185
Mr. MUSKIE. I shall try not to take more than a minute. I know that other Senators want to speak.
I simply want to make it clear that I do support this amendment, notwithstanding the fact that, in my judgment, giving up the statutory requirements for model year 1979 on hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, it is a significant additional concession to industry. But I think we have reached the point where we need to reach agreement on this issue, and I hope that we can reach agreement on this issue in a way that will finally put us on track until we achieve the goals that we laid down in 1970. Because I think the Baker amendment has that purpose and that promise, I have agreed to cosponsor it in the interest of bringing the matter to a head and resolving it finally.
With that, I commend the distinguished minority leader for offering the amendment. It has my support.
Mr. BAKER. I thank the distinguished Senator from Maine. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished Senator from California.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator, and I compliment him on what he has done here, and those others who have joined in what really is a genuine compromise, in the spirit of trying to work things out in this body.
This amendment provides an extra year to the automobile manufacturers. Like the Griffin-Riegle amendment, it requires final standards by 1980, and sticks to those standards like the committee bill.
For those concerned about diesels, it protects diesel engines. Manufacturers have testified that they can meet these standards by 1980. If that is the case, let us have this accomplished.
These standards are very important for the reasons which have been so eloquently stated in this Chamber, especially for public health, which is one of our responsibilities.
Finally, the sooner we move to achieve strict standards on emissions, the less difficulty we are going to have in our cities achieving the attainment of air standards we know we must achieve. For each year we delay in automobiles, we are going to have that much greater need for control and intervention and interference in land use and transportation in our cities, and a lot of other things that interfere with businesses and the freedom of individuals to make their choices.
For these and many other reasons which are widely known, I support this amendment.
Mr. RIEGLE. Will the Senator from Tennessee yield to me for just a brief moment?
Mr. BAKER. By all means.
Mr. RIEGLE. I appreciate his doing so. I want to set the record straight on something the committee chairman said.
It is not true that the Baker amendment holds the current standards through model year 1979. As a matter of fact, it has a 90 — 10 split and says 10 percent of the cars produced that year have to meet a different and lower set of standards. I just say that, as a practical matter, that is going to work havoc on the production schedules with that 90 to 10 split.
Mr. MUSKIE Will the Senator yield?
We have the 90 to 10 split in the committee bill. That feature was not changed.
Mr. RANDOLPH That is correct.
Mr. MUSKIE. With respect to hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide, we have given the additional year. That is all I said. I did not intend to mislead. The 90 to 10 split was in the committee bill as well.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished Senator from Vermont, the ranking Republican member on the committee.
Mr. STAFFORD. I appreciate the author's yielding to me.
Mr. President, I take 1 minute simply to join with Senator MUSKIE, Senator RANDOLPH, and the others in saying that we are pleased that we have been able, under the leadership of the minority leader, to work out a compromise which we can all support and which I signed as cosponsor. I heartily support the amendment in its present form.