Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, June 7, 1995 TAG: 9506070034
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-5 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JOEL TURNER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Goodlatte came to Northside High School this week to defend his environmental record and his vote for the Clean Water Act amendments of 1995.
He blamed the news media and other groups for presenting only one side of some environmental debates, including the recent one over the amendments.
Goodlatte, R-Roanoke, was in teacher Gretchen Boeren's earth science class because of a recent story in the Roanoke Times & World-News about the House of Representatives' approval of the amendments.
The article noted that Goodlatte voted for the revisions to the Clean Water Act, but Reps. Rick Boucher, D-Abingdon, and L.F. Payne, D-Nelson County, opposed them. The bill passed, 240-185.
The newspaper reported a series of changes in the law that some said would make it weaker, and quoted House Minority Whip David Bonior, D-Mich., who called it "the ultimate example of putting the fox in charge of the henhouse."
Some Northside students were upset by Goodlatte's support for the revisions. They wrote to him and complained about what they considered his lack of support for the environment and took the letters to his home.
Goodlatte said the news story, by the Knight-Ridder/Tribune news service, made the revisions "sound terrible, but it presented only one side of the story."
He reviewed the story with the students, paragraph by paragraph, and contended that the amendements do not weaken the Clean Water Act.
"I thought I was voting to clean up the waters," he said. "I would be upset, too, if I read this."
Opponents argue that the act's new definition of wetlands would strip federal protection from half of the nation's remaining wetlands and hamper efforts to clean up the Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes and other waterways.
But Goodlatte said the three Virginia congressmen whose districts border on the Chesapeake Bay supported the amendments.
"This bill defines wetlands. It doesn't reduce the true wetlands," he said. Under current regulations, he said, small patches in farmers' fields sometimes are classified as wetlands.
The bill includes money for many cities and counties to help correct sewer problems and reduce pollution of streams, he said. For example, it would provide up to $40 million for Lynchburg to correct a long-standing problem that leads to the dumping of sewage into the James River during heavy rains.
Goodlatte said critics mislead the public when they complain that the amendments would allow ocean dumping of lightly treated sewage. Under the standards, the sewage would be cleaner than the ocean itself, he said.
He told the students that he has to consider several issues when voting on environmental legislation: its impact on the economy; taxes; and costs.
"Some groups use strong language to stir up people and get them to send money," he said. "But I have to consider everyone."
He said the National Governors' Association, U.S. Conference of Mayors and National League of Cities supported the amendments.
But some congressmen and environmentalists argue that the bill weakens the federal water protection law and would lead to more pollution.
Bonior, the Democratic whip, said the bill was written by industry lobbyists for their benefit, not that of the public.
Environmentalists say the Republican-led Congress is revoking the protection of the nation's rivers and streams. They contend that the amendments would undermine efforts to clean up the Everglades and other waterways.
Opponents of the bill say the revisions in regulations governing cities' water- and sewage-treatment programs would loosen standards for some pollutants.
They say the changes would slow efforts to halt the flow of runoff from streets, parking lots and farm fields into the nation's streams, which many experts say is one of the biggest sources of unchecked pollution.
President Clinton has threatened to veto the amendments, which still must be considered by the Senate.
When Goodlatte finished presenting his case, the students seemed more sympathetic to his vote. They asked several questions, but none was confrontational or accusatory.
"If you get alarmed by anything else you read or hear, call us up," he told them. "Give me a chance to put some information in your hands."
by CNB