PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Superfund, Recycling. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 8, 1993
Municipal Solid Waste Flow Control Act of 1993 - Authorizes a State or a political subdivision to which a State has delegated authority, if conditions under this Act are met, to: (1) direct, limit, regulate, or prohibit the movement of municipal solid waste generated or imported within its boundaries; and (2) designate waste management facilities to which such waste shall be transported. Permits States or political subdivisions to exercise such authorities only if: (1) recyclable materials will be removed from the waste through separation at the source or at facilities unless the political subdivision in which the waste is generated is exempt from recycling requirements; and (2) the designated waste management facilities are not in violation of Federal and State environmental laws and regulations. Bars States or political subdivisions from prohibiting persons from selling, conveying, or arranging for the transportation of recyclable materials that have been separated from municipal solid waste.
People & committees
Sen. Heflin, Howell [D-AL] · D–AL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Superfund, Recycling. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S15325)
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.1634 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 S.1634 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 S.1634 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 S.1634 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.