Federal Communications Commission Process Reform Act of 2012

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I find it so interesting, as we are here debating this bill, that this is only a 21-page bill. And I don't find, Mr. Chairman, in this bill, I don't find the words ``constrained'' and ``straitjacket'' anywhere. It does not exist in this bill. And as I've heard my colleagues talk about this bill, I think that they have not read the bill. So, unlike the 2,300-page bill that is being debated at the Supreme Court across the street, I would encourage them to pick up this little 21-page bill and give it a read.

I've also found it very interesting: the White House and this administration like to say transparency is the cornerstone of their administration, but I have seen them going to just extreme lengths, it seems, the White House and the Senate, to block bringing this process reform bill forward.

Yesterday, the White House released its Statement of Administration Policy, saying, and I'm quoting: ``It is generally recognized that the FCC has improved its practices and procedures to make it more effective.''

But the truth is, in the last 50 years, what we have seen is that their rules and regulations, their impact,

their footprint, has grown 800 percent--not doubled, not a little bit a year, 800 percent. That is why we need this bill, and I commend the chairman for bringing the bill forward.

Let me tell you a few things that this bill does. I think that they are common sense. It would do a few things like allowing more time for public comments.

Well, my constituents want more time to weigh in on these issues. As they find out about these issues, more time is a very good thing. Measuring the Agency's performance with scorecards, our children have report cards. Knowing where you are and what you're doing and what kind of goal you're trying to reach, that is very healthy. That is a good thing.

Making sure the Agency doesn't attach extraneous regulations and conditions on business transactions, we're talking about jobs and the effect of regulation on jobs. It is such a positive thing to pull back regulation and free up free enterprise. That is what we should be about is making certain that we can move forward on these issues.

Requiring the Agency to do cost-benefit analysis for rules that cost more than $100 million, well, how about that? Cost-benefit analysis. Is a rule going to be worth the cost? Is it going to be worth the effort, or is it going to be too expensive to afford?

My goodness, we've had all sorts of things that they're too big to fail and too expensive to afford, so let's certainly make sure that we are evaluating these rules before they get put onto the books and before they have force of law. Let's make certain that we pass this reform bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source