|00:00:01||I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE CRANE STUDY REFERRED TO ALREADY BY THE DISTINGUISHED CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE APPARENTLY HASN'T FOUND OUT THAT IT'S BEEN HELD IN ERROR IN A NUMBER OF WAYS, BUT MOSTLY BY THE CRANE STUDY PEOPLE THEMSELVES WHO SAID THAT THEIR ANALYSIS WAS NOT MEANT TO BE A DECISIONMAKING TOOL FOR LAWMAKERS OR FEDERAL REGULATORY AGENCIES TO USE IN CHOOSING THE RIGHT LEVEL OF REGULATION.|
|00:00:45||IN OTHER WORDS, THE STUDY IS FLAWED BECAUSE IT FAILS TO ACCOUNT FOR ANY BENEFITS OF REGULATION SO THAT I -- I WANT EVERYBODY TO FEEL THAT THIS CORRECTION ABOUT $1.|
|00:01:01||75 TRILLION HAS BEEN THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED BY NOT ONLY C.|
|00:01:09||R.S. BUT OTHER AUTHORITIES AS WELL.|
|00:01:15||NOW, THIS DEBATE FOLLOWS A NUMBER OF PIECES OF LEGISLATION THAT WE ARE CONSIDERING.|
|00:01:23||IT'S SORT OF A REGULATION TIDAL WAVE OR ANTI-REGULATION TIDAL WAVE.|
|00:01:35||R. 310, REGULATORY ACCOUNTABILITY, H.|
|00:01:40||R. 10, WHICH WE WILL SEE SOON, THE RAINES ACT, AND H.|
|00:01:48||R. 527, THE BILL BEFORE US NOW, THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACT.|
|00:01:58||NOW, IT'S STRANGE TO SAY THAT THIS TRIO OF SAFETY-KILLING LEGISLATION WOULD MAKE IT HARDER TO CONTROL AND MAKE SAFE OUR PRODUCTS THAT WE COUNT ON.|
|00:02:24||UNDER THE LAW PRESENTLY, RULEMAKING MUST MAKE AN ANALYSIS FOR EVERY NEW RULE THAT WOULD HAVE SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC IMPACT ON SMALL BUSINESSES.|
|00:02:40||AMONG OTHER THINGS THE BILL WOULD REPEAL THE AUTHORITY THAT ALLOWS THE AGENCY TO WAIVE OR DELAY THIS ANALYSIS IN RESPONSE TO EVEN AN EMERGENCY.|
|00:02:55||IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE HOW THE BILL UNDER CONSIDERATION WOULD MAKE REGULATIONS MORE CUMBERSOME , WOULD TAKE LONGER, WOULD RISK NATIONAL EMERGENCIES AND WOULD LOSE A LOT OF THE SAFETY AND HEALTH PROTECTIONS THAT WE NOW ENJOY.|
|00:03:26||I FEEL THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF WHAT THE REAL FINAL GOAL IS.|
|00:03:37||NOW, "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL", NO ENEMY OF BIG BUSINESS, SAID, AND QUOTE, THE MAIN REASON UNITED STATES COMPANIES ARE RELUCTANT TO STEP UP HIRING IS SCANT DEMAND RATHER THAN UNCERTAINTY OVER GOVERNMENT POLICIES.|
|00:03:58||AND SO EVEN THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY RECOGNIZES THAT THE BIG PROBLEM ABOUT OUR ECONOMY IS NOT THAT RULES ARE TYING UP BUSINESSES BUT THAT WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE BUYING BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH JOBS.|
|00:04:18||TO CREATE THE DEMAND.|
|00:04:21||AND SO WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE TODAY, IF YOU EXAMINE IT CAREFULLY, AS MANY ON OUR COMMITTEE ON THE JIRNARY HAVE DONE, YOU WILL FIND -- JUDICIARY HAVE DONE, YOU WILL FIND THAT THE SAFETY STANDARDS OF WHICH WE ARE REALLY VERY PROUD OF ARE GOING TO BE COMPROMISED IN A VERY EMBARRASSING WAY.|
|00:04:50||REGULATIONS DON'T KILL JOBS, THEY SAVE LIVES.|
|00:04:57||THERE ARE PLANS UNDER WAY, THIS IS ONE OF THEM, HERE IN THE HOUSE TO UNDERMINE THE REGULATORY PROCESS THAT GUARANTEES THE HEALTH AND THE SAFETY OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS.|
|00:05:15||I URGE ALL OF THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE TO CAREFULLY CONSIDER THE DIRECTION OF THIS BILL AND I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF MY TIME.|
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would just like to point out that the Crain study referred to already by the distinguished chairman of the committee, apparently he hasn't found out that it's been held in error in a number of ways but mostly by the Crain study people themselves, who said that their analysis was not meant to be a decisionmaking tool for lawmakers or Federal regulatory agencies to use in choosing the right level of regulation.
In other words, the study is flawed because it fails to account for any benefits of regulation. So I want everybody to know that this correction about $1.75 trillion has been thoroughly debunked by not only CRS but other authorities as well.
Now, this debate follows a number of pieces of legislation that we're considering. It's sort of a regulation tidal wave--or anti-regulation tidal wave: H.R. 3010, Regulatory Accountability; H.R. 10, which we will see soon, the REINS Act; and H.R. 527, the bill before us now, the Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act.
[Time: 15:00] Now, it's strange to say that this trio of public safety-killing legislation would make it harder to control and make safe our products that we count on. Under the law presently, rulemaking must make an analysis for every new rule that would have a significant economic impact on small businesses. Among other things, the bill would repeal the authority that allows the agency to waive or delay this analysis in response to even an emergency. It's hard to imagine how the bill under consideration would make regulations more cumbersome, would take longer, would risk national emergencies, and would lose a lot of the safety and health protections that we now enjoy. I feel that there hasn't been a careful consideration of what the real final goal is.
The Wall Street Journal, which is no enemy of big business, said: The main reason United States companies are reluctant to step up hiring is scant demand rather than uncertainty over government policies.
So even the business community recognizes that the big problem with our economy is not that rules are tying up businesses but that we don't have enough people buying, because they don't have enough jobs to create the demand. If you examine it carefully, as many on our Committee on the Judiciary have done, you will find that the safety standards of which we are really very proud are going to be compromised in a very embarrassing way.
Regulations don't kill jobs; they save lives.
There are plans underway--this is one of them--here in the House to undermine the regulatory process that guarantees the health and the safety of millions of Americans. I urge all of the Members of the House to carefully consider the direction of this bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.