Regulation from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2015
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment to H.R. 427 would exempt rules concerning public health or safety from the onerous requirements of this legislation.
It is simply an acknowledgment that, when a rule is necessary to protect public health and when it is beneficial and in the public interest, the rule be put into effect without unnecessary delay.
If this legislation is enacted without this amendment, it will create a regulatory environment that will make it nearly impossible for agencies to safeguard the public well-being.
For instance, the Department of Transportation implemented an economically significant rule for the implementation of positive train control systems on January 15, 2010. This safety feature is designed to correct operator errors and to slow or to stop a train in order to prevent train-to-train collisions and overspeed derailments.
Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board have said that this technology is necessary to prevent accidents like the derailment of an Amtrak commuter train in Philadelphia on May 12 of 2015, which killed 7 people and injured 200 more; yet, under the REINS Act, this vital technology would require a joint congressional resolution, with an unrealistic timeline for implementation, before being mandated, needlessly putting the lives of millions of Americans at risk who ride Amtrak every year.
Proponents of this legislation may argue that H.R. 427 contains an emergency exemption which allows a major rule to temporarily take effect following an executive order stating that there is an imminent threat to public health and safety.
However, as the positive train control system rule illustrates, not every threat to the public welfare will manifest itself overnight, and not every agency's rule is implemented as a reaction to a product recall or to a sudden tragedy.
Even when a threat is not imminent, the fundamental responsibility to protect the public health and well-being remains. This legislation would substantially hinder the ability of agencies to fulfill this obligation, placing Americans at greater risk for the benefit of corporate interests.
In its present form, the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards--an alliance of more than 150 consumer, labor, faith, and other public interest groups--has characterized the REINS Act as ``the most radical threat in generations to our government's ability to protect the public from harm.''
Echoing this analysis, 83 of our Nation's top administrative and environmental law professors describe this legislation as ``unnecessary to establish agency accountability and unwise as a matter of public policy because it undercuts the implementation of laws intended to protect people and the environment.''
While my amendment will not cure all the flaws in this legislation, it will address one of the most glaring problems and preserve the ability of agencies to protect public health and safety.
I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, I just would say, in conclusion, that the amendment will, in fact, strengthen the ability of Federal agencies to protect the public health and well-being, and there are instances, as the example I just gave, where the failure to act will endanger the lives of Americans.
I urge my colleagues to support the amendment to improve a badly flawed piece of legislation.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, this amendment improves H.R. 427 by exempting those regulations that are critical to protecting the health and safety of infants.
More specifically, the Jackson Lee amendment provides a special rule pertaining to the safety of any product specifically designed to be used or consumed by a child under the age of 2 years, which includes cribs, car seats, and infant formula.
As a member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law, I am very concerned about the REINS Act and the complications and delays to the rulemaking process it would create regarding regulations that would protect the health and safety of children.
This legislation would amend the Congressional Review Act to prohibit a major rule from going into effect unless Congress enacts a joint resolution of approval within 70 legislative days. Otherwise, the rule does not go into effect.
Effectively, no regulations will ever be enacted because it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to move any proposed legislation through Congress within 70 days.
Moreover, subjecting agencies to additional reporting requirements and congressional review, as mandated by H.R. 427, would not only be wasteful, it could be damaging or even deadly, especially when it comes to regulations designed to protect children and infants.
For example, much like the version of the bill that we debated in previous sessions, the REINS Act would delay product safety rules affecting family products like toys, cribs, and children's clothing.
In particular, restrictions put forth in H.R. 427 could result in further delay to agencies attempting to take action to protect children as it relates to harmful and deadly products, such as safety caps on medicine, flammable clothing, and tipping furniture, just to name a few.
Notably, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission reports that a child dies every 2 weeks from furniture or TVs tipping over, and injuries from falling furniture occur every 24 minutes.
We cannot afford to put the lives and safety of infants, toddlers, and children at risk while Congress entangles any real possibility for immediate and preventive action.
The REINS Act is strongly opposed by many individuals and organizations all across the country, including opposition by more than 450,000 members and supporters of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientist, as well as 83 academics in the field of administrative and environmental law, and an alliance of more than 150 consumer, labor, research, faith, and other public interest groups representing the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards.
We should not hinder the democratic process and stymie regulatory agencies' ability to protect the safety and security of the American people, especially infants.
At a minimum, regulations promulgated to protect the safety of infants and children should not be subjected to the strictures of H.R. 47.
The Jackson Lee amendment protects children and infants. I urge all Members to support this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CICILLINE. Mr. Chair, no one is attempting to shield bureaucrats from anything. This amendment is designed to shield infants, to protect children.
I urge my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source