PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 29, 1994
Waste Flow Control Consensus Act of 1994 - Authorizes each State and qualified political subdivision to direct, regulate, or prohibit: (1) the transportation, management, or disposal of municipal solid waste generated from household sources within the boundaries of the State or subdivision and designate waste management facilities to which such waste shall be transported; (2) the transportation, management, or disposal of municipal solid waste, incinerator ash, and construction and demolition debris, and designate facilities to which such waste shall be transported, managed, or disposed if, before May 15, 1994, the State or political subdivision adopted a law or legally binding provision that regulated such waste or the law or provision identified the use of a waste management method that will be necessary for such activities with respect to municipal solid waste; and (3) transportation of recyclable materials generated within such boundaries and designate facilities to which such materials shall be transported. Permits States and subdivisions described in (2) above to direct, regulate, or prohibit the transportation, management, and disposal of municipal solid waste from any existing or future waste management facility to any other waste management facility without making findings that such authority is necessary to meet current or anticipated solid waste management needs. Deems any contract, law, or legally binding provision of a State or qualified political subdivision that directs, regulates, or prohibits the transportation, management, or disposal of municipal solid waste as a reasonable regulation of commerce and provides that such contracts, laws, and provisions shall not be considered as impairing, restraining, or discriminating against interstate commerce. Permits such authority with respect to recyclable materials only if: (1) the generator or owner of the materials voluntarily made the materials available to the State or subdivision and relinquished any rights to, or ownership of, such materials; and (2) the State or subdivision assumes such rights or ownership. Permits the authority with respect to municipal solid waste from household sources or recyclable materials only if the State or subdivision: (1) establishes a program to separate or divert specified materials for purposes of recycling, reclamation, or reuse before exercising such authority; and (2) finds on the basis of public hearings that it is necessary to exercise such authority to meet current or anticipated solid waste management needs. Grants the authority under this Act only if the State or political subdivision implements a competitive designation process with respect to waste management or recyclable materials facilities. Authorizes State Governors to certify that State laws and regulations in effect on May 15, 1994, satisfy requirements for the competitive designation process. Retains the applicability of certain existing laws and contracts.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Transportation and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4859 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4859 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4859 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4859 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.