Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, August 2, 1995 TAG: 9508020053
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MIKE HUDSON STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
U.S. Sen. Charles Robb may control the fate of a Republican bill that seeks to limit government rules on pollution, workplace hazards and food and highway safety.
He is one of the leaders of a group of moderate Democrats who have offered a compromise to the bill's sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole.
Robb has voted to keep a Democratic filibuster going to prevent the bill from being voted up or down. But the Republicans are just two votes short of forcing a vote, and some of the legislation's opponents say they fear Robb's efforts at compromise could give Dole a victory.
"It causes us concern," said Julie Holt, associate director of Virginia Citizen Action, a consumer and environmental group that claims 50,000 members. "We do understand he is very crucial to the fate of the bill. So far he has done the right thing. We just hope he continues to do the right thing and doesn't let these negotiations weaken current environmental standards."
Robb spokeswoman Karen Gravois said Robb is seeking "an end to gridlock on both sides" by trying to craft a compromise that will protect people's health and safety - but also protect their pocketbooks by eliminating regulations that needlessly drive up business costs.
Dole said Tuesday he expects an agreement with Democrats soon.
The Kansas Republican and presidential candidate says his regulatory plan would cut red tape by forcing federal rule-makers to weigh the actual cost of any regulation against the expected dollar value of its safety benefits. He contends that overregulation costs American families thousands of dollars a year.
Opponents include health, environmental, consumer and labor groups. They contend that Dole's legislation contains "special-interest giveaways" and "sweetheart provisions" for big business that would open the door for more pollution and more death, injury and illness in the workplace and on the highway.
Robb is caught in between: On one hand, he's being pressured by Democrats who want to kill the bill. On the other, he's being pushed by business groups who are fighting hard for regulatory changes.
"Senator Robb is committed to getting a bill that is fair," Gravois said. "He's confident that we can achieve a reasonable bill that will protect both sides. I think a lot of people are looking to him for leadership right now."
Others put Robb's role in even stronger terms. "Robb is absolutely pivotal," said one Senate staffer, who asked not to be named.
The staffer said that two weeks ago - after the Republicans fell two short of the 60 votes they need to stop the Democrats' filibuster - Robb went to Sen. John Glenn, D-Ohio, and told him, "I don't think I can stay with you on this again."
Gravois said she did not know whether Robb had said that. But she said Robb did "step up to the plate" after the Republicans failed in their third try to end the filibuster. "Sen. Robb said: 'I want a bill. I don't want to make this a political issue.'''
Both sides see this as a crucial battle over the direction of the government. Industry groups backing the anti-regulatory legislation have been giving large campaign contributions to Congress members. Political-action committees tied to Project Relief, a business organization that is leading the fight for deregulation, gave Robb $66,529 from 1989 through 1994, according to research by the Washington-based Environmental Working Group.
Holt said the bill's opponents are worried about the role of Robb's former law firm, Richmond-based Hunton & Williams. The firm, which represents several major companies that are lobbying for "regulatory relief," has been advising Republicans on the legislation. Federal Election Commission records show Robb received $22,000 from Hunton & Williams attorneys and their families during his 1994 campaign against Oliver North.
Gravois said Hunton & Williams' role in the process does not create a conflict of interest. She said Robb has been "open to hearing everyone's positions" on the legislation. And besides, she said, the Hunton & Williams attorneys are "sitting on the other side of the fence," because they were brought in by the Republicans.
The bill Democrats and Republicans are fighting over has received little detailed attention from the media or the public, partly because of its complexity.
Dole's proposal would require government agencies to use cost-benefit analyses when they write regulations: If the price businesses must pay exceeds the dollar benefits a rule provides, then a cheaper alternative would have to be found.
Dole says this is a common-sense approach that won't destroy existing environmental, health and safety laws. He says critics are shouting "the sky is falling" and using arguments that are "false in every way."
"Apparently, the 'Chicken Littles' who have engaged in these scare tactics did not even bother to read the legislation," Dole said last month.
Critics say the "cost-benefit" requirement is not as simple as it sounds. How, for example, can government put a price tag on the lives of workers who will die in construction accidents or on children who will lose IQ points because they've been exposed to lead paint?
The opponents also point to recent opinion surveys that show strong support for environmental laws. While most voters say they want less government, they also say they don't want changes in laws protecting the air, water and land. A poll commissioned by the Environmental Information Center found 61 percent of Virginia voters agreed that "environmental laws have worked" to protect health and safety and are worth the costs. Just 23 percent said that environmental rules go too far and should be loosened.
by CNB