I share with you an idea that was most eloquently stated by the late Leon Green of the University of Texas Law School. Professor Green observed that law and lawyers merit no particular reverence except to the extent they enable people to carry on their various activities conveniently and safely. I will consider this idea in light of some issues raised during our Airlie deliberations.

Our first topic was bankruptcy. We examined the bankruptcy regime as it dealt with yet another subtle and complicated problem testing the capabilities of the bankruptcy bar and bench. In the final analysis, there was no transformation of bankruptcy law into something else by virtue of having addressed tough environmental problems. Rather, there were struggles with the particular issues in bankruptcy law's customary manner within its customary framework. This is confirmed by the Supreme Court's 1985 decision in Kovacs, which held that claims for hazardous waste cleanup costs are just like any other claims presented to a bankruptcy court and may be discharged through bankruptcy proceedings. Only a superficial reading of Midlantic, decided the following year, would yield any different conclusion. Read superficially, one might believe Midlantic holds that no longer can a bankruptcy trustee ever abandon contaminated property. Such a reading, though, is much too simplistic. The key concern of bankruptcy remains the division of the proceeds of the debtor's estate, and Midlantic does not stand for the proposition that claims for cleanup costs have priority over other claims.