Last Thursday, the House passed two bills designed to hamstring the regulatory process.
First up was the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2015. The GOP claims that their “sunshine” bill is about transparency, but the only transparent thing is their motivation: helping big business to avoid regulations.
Here’s what the bill would do:
This bill would require the federal government to provide advance public notice before discussions regarding consent decrees or settlement agreements. This change would significantly delay the federal rulemaking process which could potentially endanger Americans by delaying rules designed to protect their health and safety.
The bill would impose additional barriers and procedural requirements on consent decrees and settlements. It claims to address “sue and settle” actions in which a settlement is reached between a public interest plaintiff and a “sympathetic” federal agency which then issues rules using the settlement as an excuse. In December, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found no evidence to support this assumption.
H.R. 712 would delay the implementation of new rules by requiring that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) make any agency rule be available online for six months before the rule can take effect. This delay could potentially put the public at risk by delaying rules that could protect public health, welfare, safety, and the environment.
Current law requires Federal agencies to adhere to strict, statutory mandates and requires that agencies promulgate regulations with reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs, to consider regulatory alternatives, and are ultimately in the best interest of the public. H.R. 712 is yet another Republican solution in search of a problem and another attack on the Federal government. It will use taxpayer dollars to essentially put people at risk by subjecting agencies to cumbersome, complex, arbitrary mandates in an effort to create inaction.
The bill passed 244 to 173.
3 Democrats joined the GOP in voting for it: Jack Carney (DE-AL), Henry Cuellar (TX-28), and Collin Peterson (MN-07).
There were roll call votes for four amendments.
Hank Johnson (GA-04) offered an amendment to exempt from the bill any rule, consent decree, or settlement agreement that the Office of Management and Budget determines would result in net job creation and whose benefits exceeds its costs.
The amendment failed 175 to 242.
Collin Peterson (MN-07) and Kurt Schrader (OR-05) voted with the Republicans.
Elijah Cummings (MD-07) offered an amendment to strike the provision of the bill that establishes a six-month moratorium on new rules, with limited exceptions, and requires new actions by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) and duplicative publications related to rulemakings.
The amendment failed 174 to 244.
Scott Peters (C-52), Collin Peterson (MN-07), and Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09) joined the GOP in voting for it.
Stephen Lynch (MA-08) offered an amendment to require federal agencies to provide an estimate of the benefits of proposed regulations rather than only the costs. It would also require OIRA to include the total benefits of proposed and final agency rules in the annual cumulative assessment of agency rule making required by the bill, whereas the bill prohibits OIRA from including benefits in such cumulative assessments.
The amendment failed 180 to 235.
Loretta Sanchez (CA-46) and Kurt Schrader (OR-05) voted with the Republicans.
5 Republicans voted with the Democrats: Charlie Dent (PA-15), Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-08), Chris Gibson (NY-19), Mark Meadows (NC-11), and Bill Shuster (PA-09).
Hank Johnson (GA-04) then offered a second amendment, to clarify that the exception to the rule should take effect in the event that there is a threat to health or safety or other emergency and not only when such threat is imminent.
The amendment failed 173 to 241.
Collin Peterson (MN-07) and Kurt Schrader (OR-05) voted with the Republicans.
The Republicans like to bash unelected commissions. Well, unless they are unelected, unaccountable commissions tasked with gutting regulations. Because that’s what the Searching for and Cutting Regulations that are Unnecessarily Burdensome (SCRUB) Act does.
Here’s more on what that bill would do:
This bill would establish an un-elected, nine-member commission to review existing federal rules and regulations and identify those they determine should be repealed on the faulty premises that regulations have an adverse impact on economic growth, job creation, and innovation. In fact, H.R. 1155 would make it easier to roll back existing regulations and make it harder for every department and agency in the federal government to issue new ones. The unelected commission would have the power to issue subpoenas “requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of any evidence relating to the duties of the commission.” This broad, unspecified authority will give an unelected panel more power than Inspectors General, while having no oversight or accountability, all at the expense of taxpayers.
In addition, Members of Congress would be unable to debate and vote on each rule recommended for immediate repeal by the committee, and instead would be forced to vote on rule repeals as a package. Any recommended repeal that is approved by Congress would result in the specified agency having to rescind the covered rules within sixty days. H.R. 1155 would essentially take the power away from elected representatives and Members of Congress, and give the power to an unelected appointed panel.
Further, H.R. 1155 would create a “regulatory cut-go” procedure not dependent on congressional approval that would require any agency issuing a new regulation to repeal an existing regulation of greater or equal value within its jurisdiction that the commission has determined should be abolished. Under “regulatory cut-go,” all regulations recommended by the Commission for repeal would be placed into an inventory of regulations which the agencies would be required to repeal over time through a “cut-go” process as agencies promulgate new regulations. The costs of each new agency regulation must be offset by cost-reductions associated with the repeal of regulations in the inventory of regulations, until each agency completes the repeals of its own regulations specified in the inventory. Simply put, no federal agency could issue a new rule, however justified or in the public’s immediate interest, unless it cut an existing one that imposes equal “costs” on the economy
This bill would give enormous power to an appointed committee with virtually no oversight or regulations, while tying the hands of agencies that are knowledgeable and have extensive experience in particular areas. It would put the American people at risk, while wasting their tax dollars.
It passed 245 to 174.
Six Democrats joined the GOP in voting for it:
Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
Two Republicans voted against it: Walter Jones (NC-03) and Tom Massie (KY-04).
There were roll call votes on six amendments.
Hank Johnson (GA-04) offered an amendment to eliminate the section of the bill that creates a "cut-go" process requiring agencies to eliminate rules identified by the Regulatory Retrospective Review Commission prior to issuing a new rule.
It failed 174 to 239.
Three Democrats voted against it: Brad Ashford (NE-02), Collin Peterson (MN-07), and Kurt Schrader (OR-05).
Elijah Cummings (MD-07) offered an amendment to strike the section of the bill relating to judicial review.
It failed 172 to 244.
Five Democrats voted against it:
Brad Ashford (NE-02)
Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
Scott Peters (CA-52)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
David Cicilline (RI-01) offered an amendment to exempt rules made by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from the additional provisions of the bill.
It failed 176 to 241.
4 Democrats voted against it:
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)
Kyrsten Sinema (AZ-09)
And 3 Republicans voted for it: Rod Blum (IA-01), Walter Jones (NC-03), and Scott Rigell (VA-02).
Suzan DelBene (WA-01) offered an amendment to create an exemption from regulatory "cut-go" requirements in the case of an emergency.
It failed 176 to 39.
2 Republicans—Garret Graves (LA-06) and Jaime Herrera Beutler (WA-03)—voted for it, and Collin Peterson (MN-07) voted against it.
David Cicilline (RI-01) offered a second amendment, to provide that the term "rule" has the meaning given in section 551 of title 5, United States Code, except for a special rule as made by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
It failed 173 to 244.
3 Democrats voted against it: Jim Costa (CA-16), Collin Peterson (MN-07), and Kurt Schrader (OR-05).
Mark Pocan (WI-02) offered an amendment to exempt from the bill rules put forth by the FDA for the purposes of consumer safety.
It failed 173 to 245.
4 Democrats voted against it:
Jim Cooper (TN-05)
Jim Costa (CA-16)
Collin Peterson (MN-07)
Kurt Schrader (OR-05)