[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                 REVIEWING THE SBA'S OFFICE OF ADVOCACY
                REPORT ON THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               before the

                      COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
                             UNITED STATES
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              HEARING HELD
                             JUNE 22, 2023

                               __________




                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                               





            Small Business Committee Document Number 118-019
             Available via the GPO Website: www.govinfo.gov





                               ______
                                 

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

52-558                    WASHINGTON : 2024









                   HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

                    ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas, Chairman
                      BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
                        PETE STAUBER, Minnesota
                        DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania
                         BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas
                         MARIA SALAZAR, Florida
                          TRACEY MANN, Kansas
                           JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
                        MARC MOLINARO, New York
                         MARK ALFORD, Missouri
                           ELI CRANE, Arizona
                          AARON BEAN, Florida
                           WESLEY HUNT, Texas
                         NICK LALOTA, New York
               NYDIA VELAZQUEZ, New York, Ranking Member
                          JARED GOLDEN, Maine
                         KWEISI MFUME, Maryland
                        DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota
                          GREG LANDSMAN, Ohio
                       MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky
                  MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ, Washington
                       HILLARY SCHOLTEN, Michigan
                        SHRI THANEDAR, Michigan
                          JUDY CHU, California
                         SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
                      CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire

                  Ben Johnson, Majority Staff Director
                 Melissa Jung, Minority Staff Director








                            C O N T E N T S

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Hon. Blaine Luetkemeyer..........................................     1
Hon. Nydia Velazquez.............................................     2

                                WITNESS

Mr. Major L. Clark, Deputy Chief Counsel for Advocacy, United 
  States Small Business Administration-Office of Advocacy, 
  Washington, DC.................................................     4

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statement:
    Mr. Major L. Clark, Deputy Chief Counsel for Advocacy, United 
      States Small Business Administration-Office of Advocacy, 
      Washington, DC.............................................    25
Questions and Answers for the Record:
    Questions from Hon. Williams and Answers from Mr. Clark......    59
Additional Material for the Record:
    NFIB.........................................................    63
    U.S. Chamber of Commerce.....................................    66









 
                 REVIEWING THE SBA'S OFFICE OF ADVOCACY
                REPORT ON THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT

                              ----------                              


                        THURSDAY, JUNE 22, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
               Committee on Small Business,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:02 a.m., in Room 
2360, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Blaine Luetkemeyer 
[vice chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Williams, Luetkemeyer, Stauber, 
Meuser, Van Duyne, Salazar, Mann, Ellzey, Molinaro, Alford, 
Crane, Bean, Hunt, LaLota, Velazquez, Golden, Mfume, McGarvey, 
Scholten, Thanedar, Chu, Davids, and Pappas.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. [Presiding] Okay. We will begin the 
hearing with our prayer and pledge. Today, the prayer is led by 
Mr. Crane from Arizona.
    Mr. CRANE. All right. Dear Heavenly Father, thank you so 
much for giving us the opportunity to be here in the nation's 
capital. We ask that you continue to bless this nation. Guide 
us, direct us, give us wisdom. And we also ask for prosperity 
to continue to flow to the citizens of this country. In your 
son's name, Amen.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. With that we will stand for the pledge.
    Welcome to everyone this morning. Chairman Williams is out 
and in his vernacular the ace of the pitching staff is on leave 
today and we have reached the bullpen to get the relief pitcher 
coming in. So that is where I am at this morning. Glad to be 
with everybody. Glad we are able to do this.
    So I now call the Committee on Small Business to order. And 
without objection the Chair is authorized to declare a recess 
of the Committee at any time.
    I now recognize myself for my opening statement.
    Welcome to today's hearing which will focus on reviewing 
the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy Report 
on the Regulatory Flexibility Act. First, I want to thank our 
witness, Mr. Major L. Clark, who serves as the deputy chief 
counsel for Advocacy at the SBA. Hope this is the first of 
several productive hearings we will have with you this 
Congress, and I appreciate you speaking with us today, sir.
    This hearing could not be coming at a more important time. 
The Office of Advocacy is intended to be a crucial tool, 
serving as a watch dog and advocating for small businesses 
within the federal rulemaking process. This Committee has drawn 
great attention to our concerns with the federal government 
regarding the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The Biden Administration's actions with rulemaking have 
proven the need to strengthen the RFA in order to be an 
effective check for small businesses. We have seen the 
insufficiencies through numerous examples of federal agencies 
failing to consider the impact of their rulemaking on small 
businesses.
    Although the Office of Advocacy is doing more work with the 
RFA than it has in the last 10 years, excessive regulations are 
continuing to hurt small businesses. It is clear we must 
conduct this necessary oversight to ensure the Biden 
administration is properly amending the laws designed to 
safeguard small businesses and the regulatory process, not 
create a further burden.
    Creating this change starts with the Office of Advocacy. 
Over the years, your office has faced several challenges in its 
duty to advocate for small businesses. While you are recognized 
as being independent of the SBA, it is clear there is often 
association that makes it difficult for your office to have a 
final say throughout the regulatory development process.
    Another concern previously addressed by this Committee is 
the Office's Chief Counsel of Advocacy position sitting vacant 
since 2017. We have sent letters to President Biden calling for 
him to fill this position. It is clear to this Committee that 
President Biden does not see this position as a priority. 
Perhaps this administration would like to leave this position 
vacant so they can continue with their reckless rulemaking 
agenda.
    To date, the federal government has done a shameful job of 
meeting their responsibility to consider the impact that 
proposed regulations will have on small businesses. The 
Democrat standard of ramming through crushing regulations, 
reckless spending, and driving up costs on small businesses 
must stop. Burdensome regulations and government red tape 
create a headache for all Americans but they are especially 
harmful for main street.
    Today, examining a report on the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
is an important step to continuing exposing the federal 
government's failures and abuses to provide protections for 
main street. As a Member of the House Committee on Small 
Business, we will continue to fight for these crucial revisions 
in the RFA and rulemaking process to support Main Street 
America and President Biden clearly is not.
    With that, Mr. Clark, thank you again for joining us today. 
We look forward to the conversation ahead.
    Before I yield I would ask for unanimous consent to enter 
into the record a statement from the NFIB. And without 
objection, so ordered.
    I now recognize our Ranking Member from New York, Ms. 
Velazquez, for her opening remarks.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Clark, welcome 
back to the committee.
    I want to take a moment to thank you for your service. I 
know that you have been the Acting Chief Counsel of Advocacy 
for more than 6 years and your dedication is commendable. The 
position of chief counsel is an important role.
    The Office of Advocacy serves as the independent voice of 
small businesses within the federal government. It is their job 
to promote the concerns of small firms before all three 
branches of the federal government and state policymakers. A 
central component of that role is to monitor and report on 
agencies' compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or 
RFA.
    Today, I hope to have a productive discussion on Advocacy's 
RFA work in fiscal year 2022.
    As you know, 99.9 percent of all U.S. businesses are 
considered small. Some of these small firms can have 1,500 
employees and up to $47 million in receipts, depending on the 
industry.
    While they may be considered small in their sector, many of 
the larger firms have lawyers, accountants, and other experts 
who understand the rules, submit comments on rules to the 
agency, and help the business comply with regulations.
    It is important to make this distinction during our 
discussion today and take the time to learn more about how the 
Office of Advocacy conducts outreach to ensure the views of the 
smallest of the small businesses are being conveyed to the 
agencies, and in turn, level the playing field for small 
businesses.
    We must also discuss comment letters Advocacy files with 
federal agencies, which are not violation letters, but efforts 
to alert agencies to their rules' impact on small businesses.
    In many areas these letters are effective, leading to a 
number of modifications to the rules that have benefitted small 
businesses and still achieved the mission of the regulations.
    Contrary to what we will hear today, federal regulations 
can and do benefit our economy, like regulations that protect 
our air and waters, boosting small businesses that comprise the 
outdoor recreational industry, which accounted for $454 billion 
of our GDP in 2021.
    The key is not to roll back all regulations that protect 
our health, safety, and environment but to allow Advocacy to 
work with agencies to recognize the impact regulations have on 
small businesses, and work to find ways to balance the shared 
goal of minimizing the burdens and achieving the goal of the 
regulation.
    Smart, well-crafted, common-sense regulations have the 
potential to unleash innovation and provide critical health, 
safety, and environmental protections.
    With that, thank you again for testifying today, and I look 
forward to hearing more about the regulatory work you have 
performed and how we can strengthen the Office of Advocacy and 
ensure that small businesses have a voice at all levels of 
government.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. The gentlelady yields back.
    With that we will now introduce our witness, Mr. Major L. 
Clark. Mr. Clark is the deputy chief counsel for Advocacy for 
the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy. 
Currently, he leads the office and is responsible for the day-
to-day operations. Prior to his time at the SBA, Mr. Clark was 
a senior corporate officer for the Maxima Corporation managing 
several multimillion dollar federal contracts. Earlier in his 
career in public service, Mr. Clark worked on this very 
committee as the chief administrative officer. Mr. Clark earned 
his Juris Doctorate and Masters of Urban Planning from the 
University of Iowa and a Bachelor of Science in Political 
Science from North Carolina Agricultural and Technical 
University. He also served as a professor in the Graduate Urban 
Planning program at Morgan State University.
    Mr. Clark, thank you for being here today. We look forward 
to the conversation ahead.
    Before recognizing the witness I would like to remind him 
that his oral testimony is restricted to 5 minutes. If you see 
the red light come on in front of you, sir, that indicates that 
it is time to wrap up your testimony and your questioning. I 
would ask you to make these microphones pull forward. The whole 
box can be pulled forward. Make sure that you speak into it 
clearly not only for the benefit for us but I know we are 
taking notes. The stenographer is here and they need to be able 
to hear your words distinctly.
    So with that, you are recognized for 5 minutes, Mr. Clark.

STATEMENT OF MAJOR L. CLARK, DEPUTY CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY, 
     U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION-OFFICE OF ADVOCACY

    Mr. CLARK. Good morning, Chairman Luetkemeyer, and Ranking 
Member Velazquez, and Members of the Committee. I am honored to 
be here today on behalf of the Office of Advocacy to present 
testimony to you on federal agency compliance with the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    Advocacy is an independent office that is required by 
statute to speak on behalf of the small business community 
before federal agencies, Congress, and the White House. This 
testimony does not reflect the views of the administration and 
has not been circulated to the Office of Management and Budget 
for clearance. In fact, none of our products are cleared by the 
administration because of our independence.
    As deputy chief counsel, and on behalf of the entire 
Advocacy family, I would like to thank the Committee for your 
continued support over the years. Congress recognized the 
importance of small businesses to our nation's economy. As 
such, Advocacy was created in 1976 to be an independent voice 
for small businesses within the federal government, 
particularly during the federal regulatory process.
    Our legal team works to ensure agencies' regulations do not 
unduly burden small businesses. Our Economic Research team 
conducts important research on small businesses and their role 
in the economy. And our regional advocates provide outreach to 
small business stakeholders across the country.
    I will also note that 4 years after the passage of the RFA, 
and I must have been 10 years old, I was the staff director of 
this Committee, so I understand firsthand the work that goes 
into important legislation such as this and how important small 
businesses are to the economy and to Congress.
    The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires federal agencies to 
consider the impact of their regulatory proposals on small 
entities, analyze effective alternatives that minimize small 
entity impacts, and make their analysis available for public 
comment. As the watchdog for small businesses, Congress charged 
Advocacy with ensuring agency compliance with this law. The 
specific requirements of the RFA are discussed in my written 
testimony.
    Advocacy reports to Congress every year on agency 
compliance with the RFA. Our report for fiscal year 2022 was 
submitted to this Committee last month. Advocacy continued to 
remain active during fiscal year 2022 on behalf of our nation's 
small businesses. In fact, our output increased compared to 
previous years. We submitted a record 37 comment letters to 
federal agencies and hosted a record 30 roundtables on 
regulatory concerns facing small businesses.
    We also provided training to 257 officials at 10 agencies. 
We conducted four SBREFA panels with the CFPB and the EPA. We 
also achieved numerous victories for small businesses because 
of working with agencies on RFA compliance. These numbers were 
due in large part to new methods of communication and outreach 
Advocacy has adopted since the COVID-19 pandemic to reach more 
small businesses, including holding virtual meetings and 
roundtables.
    Regarding agency compliance with the RFA, in recent years 
the most frequent concerns Advocacy has cited in public comment 
letters to agencies were deficiencies in the RFA analysis. 
These include but are not limited to inadequate analysis of 
small entity impacts, and lack of consideration of significant 
alternatives. Advocacy has also increasingly argued that 
agencies need to conduct more outreach to small entities during 
the rulemaking process.
    Mr. Chairman, Advocacy is aware of H.R. 399, the Small 
Business Advocacy Improvements Act, which recently passed the 
House of Representatives. This bill would amend Advocacy's 
charter to clarify our authority to research and represent 
small interests on international issues. Because Advocacy 
already does these activities, this is a commonsense change to 
our charter.
    Mr. Chairman, this concludes my oral testimony and I 
request that Advocacy's RFA report 2022 be included in the 
record, in the hearing record.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Without objection.
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today 
and I am happy to answer any questions that you may have.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Thank you, Mr. Clark.
    With that we will move to the Member questions under the 5-
minute rule and I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    The Office of Advocacy's most recent report that we just 
entered into the record stated that your office, and you stated 
this in your testimony, submitted 37 comment letters, held over 
30 roundtables, and trained 257 federal agency staff on the 
RFA. This is some of the highest volume work that has come out 
of this office in decades. However, much of it seems to have 
been in vain if we are looking at the mountains of regulations 
that have been placed on small businesses in the past few 
years. The American Action Forum estimates there have been over 
$318 billion in total costs and 218 million additional 
paperwork hours associated with President Biden's regulatory 
actions from just his first 2 years in office.
    So Mr. Clark, do you feel that your guidance is taken 
seriously by the administration, the various agencies? I mean, 
I realize that you are writing letters and you are having 
roundtables, trying to train people, and yet we wind up with 
$318 billion worth of costs in new rules and regulations, and 
some of them do not follow up with small business costs.
    Can you comment on that?
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your question.
    Yes, I do think that the Office of Advocacy has its work in 
terms of representing small businesses, continues to make 
improvements for our small businesses, and specifically, in our 
small business economy. I go back in time as I said in my 
report to the period of time in which there was not a 
Regulatory Flexibility Act, and moving forward there has been 
tremendous changes, some changes to the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act, improving the process. But the overall thrust of that has 
been to give more support to our small businesses as they 
continue to be the economic backbone of this country.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Well, I guess the question is do you think 
the agencies are living up to their requirements to file 
reports with regard to the impact on small businesses? And it 
does not appear to be that way to me whenever, if you look at 
the lack of reports that come out of some of the agencies when 
it comes to some of these rulings. There is no report with 
regards to the impact on small businesses, and if it is, it is 
just sort of lip service. There is no real true analysis there. 
Would you agree with that?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. I would agree that in some of the 
regulatory actions that the analysis has not been true. And 
that has been one of the elements that we have pointed out in 
our comment letters to the agencies. But it is also one of the 
elements in which we have been working diligent with agencies 
to improve their analysis of small businesses.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Well, so that begs the question that if 
they are not doing the job then how can we get them to do the 
job? What kind of enforcement mechanism do we need in place? 
And so I just want to throw something out here for you to 
consider and we can discuss further. But it seems to me that if 
they are not going to follow this, and they have been given the 
charge to do their own analysis, if they are not doing it, 
maybe we need the CBO or maybe we need your office to do the 
analysis of all these rules to find out what the real cost of 
them is as well as the impact on small businesses, because they 
are not submitting reports now, and the ones they do submit are 
not quite frankly worthwhile. So we need to have an independent 
third party coming in and doing their work if they are not 
going to do it.
    Would you agree with that or have you got a better idea? I 
have got a minute and a half to discuss this.
    Mr. CLARK. Well, I do not know if we need a third party to 
come in. I think one of the areas that we have looked at over 
the period of time since I have been in Advocacy has been the 
shortage or the lack of data that is available on small 
businesses. And we have worked very diligently with the Census 
office to develop much better data on small business and small 
business impact. So I think part of what we see developing over 
a period of time has been this lack of data. And we see in 
those agencies where data has been much better in terms of 
analysis, that the analysis has been much more beneficial to 
small businesses.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Well, I know as the Ranking Member in the 
last term we worked with a number of different groups, whether 
it was the Chamber of Commerce, the NFIB, Job Creators Network. 
There are a lot of different entities out there that have lots 
of information on small businesses and the effect that these 
rules have. As I indicated in my question earlier, the American 
Action Forum did an estimate of $318 billion on the cost of 
these rules. So I think there is probably enough data 
available. We just have to find a way to get it accumulated.
    With that, my time is expired. Thank you for your testimony 
this morning, Mr. Clark.
    And with that we recognize the lady from New York, the 
Ranking Member, Ms. Velazquez, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Clark, the size standard for some industries allows 
small firms to have 1,500 employees, and an average receipt up 
to $47 million. Your office advocates on behalf of these larger 
companies in the name of small businesses. Can you address this 
concern?
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you for your question, Ranking Member 
Velazquez.
    One of the things that we have been pushing agencies to do 
in their analysis is to recognize that the regulation one size 
does not fit all. And in that regard what we have been working 
very diligently trying to get them to do is analyze the impact 
of the regulation on different levels of small business. So, 
yes, the larger businesses as you said in your opening 
statement do have more resources, but we also are very 
concerned with that one, two, three, four-man person shop that 
are without those resources. And those are the ones that we 
want the agencies to work on.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I hear you.
    Trade associations and law firms which represent both big 
and small businesses participate in your events and are sharing 
the views of big businesses. What steps do you take to ensure 
that the feedback that you are soliciting is truly that of 
small businesses and not just those that have the resources to 
hire attorneys and consultants?
    Mr. CLARK. Our roundtables are open to the public. But as 
we engage individuals who are talking, doing those roundtables 
and so forth, we engage them to inform us of who they are and 
what type of business they have, the size of their business. So 
we are very conscious of the fact that because our roundtables 
are open to the public others can come in. But we try to 
streamline that process when it comes to receiving the 
information from those who are testifying or providing 
information to us.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. How do you do that? Do you have the staff?
    Mr. CLARK. Our staff, during our roundtables, whatever 
lawyer is in charge of that roundtable is asking that question. 
So a person presents, we ask that person exactly tell us about 
your business.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. The RFA requires agencies to consider the 
regulatory impacts on small entities, but when Advocacy submits 
comment letters to agencies, it focuses on the potential costs 
of regulations. This is only half of the equation. Why does 
Advocacy not report on the benefits of regulation to small 
businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. In part because our statutory mandate requires 
us to focus on cost.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I know that. That is what the law says.
    Mr. CLARK. Yeah. Yeah.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. What needs to be done to get a complete 
analysis of the impacts on small businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, one of the things we do and we recognize, 
that small businesses are not monolithic, and that small 
businesses have different interests. So in our analysis, in our 
discussions on compliance, one of the things we are doing is 
trying to bring all viewpoints of small businesses to that 
process. And in that regard, there are small businesses that 
will share with us that a proposed regulation may very well be 
beneficial to them as opposed to overly burdensome in terms of 
costs. So we try to put all of that into the discussions that 
we have with the agencies regarding that regulation.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I think that going forward it is very 
important so that everyone could have a whole picture of the 
impact or benefits of such regulations.
    I am pleased that Advocacy has adopted new ways to reach 
more businesses. Have the online roundtables and events led to 
more outreach to small businesses that historically have not 
attended?
    Mr. CLARK. We think so. We think because the technology has 
been drastically improved, which allows for virtual 
roundtables, we think we are able to reach a much larger 
segment of the small business community. We are able to reach 
many small businesses who simply can't take time from their 
work to attend a very formal process but can, in fact, go 
online on their computer or their cell phone and participate.
    Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Time has expired.
    With that I recognize Mr. Crane from Arizona for 5 minutes.
    Mr. CRANE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First I want to start by saying thank you, Mr. Clark, for 
appearing before the Committee today.
    Sir, would you say that you believe in environmental 
justice?
    Mr. CLARK. How would you define environmental justice, sir? 
I mean, I do believe in environmental justice across the board. 
Yes.
    Mr. CRANE. Can you go into that a little and why you 
believe in that?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, environmental justice for me personally is 
a process of keeping in balance the structure that has been 
placed before us. You know, that God has placed before us. And 
I believe that there needs to be that balance in terms of how 
we interact with the environment.
    Mr. CRANE. Thank you.
    Would you say that your office is an advocate of the 
Justice 40 Initiative?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office has presented information on the 
Justice-40 Initiative in the sense of getting a much more 
robust involvement with the broader community, yes.
    Mr. CRANE. Do you think the EPA could apply these 
regulations inconsistently or in a way that prevents small 
businesses from developing?
    Mr. CLARK. Our intent in the Office of Advocacy is to 
continue to work with EPA so that that does not happen.
    Mr. CRANE. Sir, are you aware that the Environmental 
Justice Small Grans program has funded projects completely 
unrelated to environmental justice?
    Mr. CLARK. I am aware of some of those through our 
attorneys, yes.
    Mr. CRANE. What would you say, sir, is the most effective 
thing that your office has done to advocate for small business?
    Mr. CLARK. I am sorry, can you repeat your question?
    Mr. CRANE. What would you say is the most effective thing 
that your office has done to advocate for small business?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office has over the years presented itself 
to all of the federal agencies as representing small business. 
We continue to promote the statutory mandate that we are the 
watchdog of small business. And in that regard, we have been I 
think very successful in getting agencies to understand the 
role that we play and that we are there to represent the 
interests of small business.
    Mr. CRANE. Okay.
    Mr. CLARK. I can give you examples of some of the things we 
that we have done.
    Mr. CRANE. Yesterday, sir, I had the Arizona Restaurant 
Association in my office. We had about a dozen small business 
owner-operators in my office. One of the things that they were, 
you know, very concerned about is, you know, the raising of 
minimum wage. They talked about how it was affecting them. Has 
your office done any advocacy whatsoever to push back on these 
types of mandatory raises that are crushing small businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office has been aggressively involved with 
the----
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Clark, Mr. Clark, can you pull the 
microphone closer to you, please?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes, sir. Can you hear me now?
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Yeah, that is fine. Thank you.
    Mr. CLARK. I am sorry. Our office has been aggressively 
involved with the Department of Labor on that particular issue 
from the outset, and we have had roundtables across the 
country. We have submitted comment letters. We have presented 
various viewpoints on the impact of the minimum wage on small 
businesses. And we have had----
    Mr. CRANE. So real quick, sorry to interrupt you, sir, but 
you would say that your office has actually pushed back on 
making a set minimum wage mandatory for small businesses; is 
that what you are saying?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office has responded to the proposed 
regulations from the Department of Labor carrying forward the 
comments from small businesses in terms of the impact of those 
regulations on their businesses, yes.
    Mr. CRANE. Thank you.
    What about this administration's seeming war on gas and oil 
as soon as they took office. Have you guys advocated at all 
about that and just the crushing impact that that has had on 
not only transportation but delivery of all small goods that 
these small businesses use?
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. We are out of time. 35:35xxx
    Can he answer that really quickly, Mr. Chairman?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office--I am sorry. Excuse me.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. We are out of time.
    Mr. CLARK. We will be happy to answer that question in 
writing, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. LUETKEMEYER. We are out of time.
    With that we go to the gentleman, Mr. McGarvey, from 
Kentucky for 5 minutes.
    Mr. MCGARVEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Clark, thank you for being here today. At least in my 
time on this Committee you have the distinction of having one 
of the coolest names so I can see why they made you the third. 
That is a name you hold on to and pass down.
    As you know, the Office of Advocacy was created by Congress 
in 1976 to be the independent voice for the small business 
community within the federal government. That is a major, major 
responsibility and one that we think is very important. Small 
businesses are the backbone of our economy and they need to 
have a voice, an advocate in the federal government that is 
looking out for them.
    Part of today's focus is the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 
This requires federal agencies to work with the Office of 
Advocacy to gather input from small businesses during the 
rulemaking process so that our agencies can actually understand 
how the rules and regulations we are promulgating will impact 
small businesses. We need federal agencies to be able to create 
strong rules and regulations, but we need those rules and 
regulations to work. We have to make sure that the small 
businesses have their voice heard in the rulemaking process and 
that the proposed rules do not unduly burden our small 
businesses.
    So Mr. Clark, what steps has the Office of Advocacy taken 
with federal agencies and small businesses to ensure that the 
rules and regulations achieve their policy goals without 
hurting small businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you for your question.
    The Office of Advocacy works with agencies in the 
development, as they develop the proposed regulations that they 
want to implement. We have over the years been able to work 
much more closely with the agency as they develop their 
regulation. Agencies have asked us for input really on their 
regulations as it impacts small businesses. So we have become 
very aggressive but not overbearing in terms of our ability to 
work with the drafters of regulations, giving them suggestions 
and input in terms of how that proposed regulations will impact 
small business.
    Mr. MCGARVEY. Thank you. And again, that is important 
because sometimes something looks good on paper in the 
legislative body. Then all of a sudden it gets out there in the 
wild and where the rubber meets the road it does not work as 
well. So I appreciate you taking an advocacy stance.
    It is important, too, I think when looking at the advocacy 
how you balance things. It is a balancing act; right? So how do 
you balance the competing interests of wanting to create rules 
that are as effective as possible, for instance, strong 
environmental regulations, without harming small businesses and 
their competitiveness?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, part of what we do in that regard is to 
try to provide the agency with a balanced analysis of how their 
proposed rule may be impacting small business. And that takes 
into consideration those small businesses that are supporting 
the regulation and those small businesses that are not. So, we 
try to give the agency that type of assessment but also giving 
them or trying to provide them with data from time to time that 
we have on the various small businesses that will be impacted. 
And that was the question earlier to Ranking Member Velazquez 
was that we recognize that small businesses, one size does not 
fit all in terms of small businesses. So we try to give the 
agency that viewpoint as they look at the regulatory processes.
    Mr. MCGARVEY. Thank you. I think very important. And in my 
small remaining time I just want to point out in my state of 
Kentucky we make a little product called bourbon. And 95 
percent of the country's bourbon is made in my state. One 
hundred percent of the good stuff. And a lot of those are made 
by small distilleries in the state. Small businesses.
    So my colleagues on this Committee knows it takes four 
things to make bourbon. You have got to have corn, yeast, a new 
charred white oak barrel, and of course, water. So water 
regulations are very important for us in the state of Kentucky. 
We have been watching the WOTUS rulemaking closely.
    How does your office work with the EPA? And have you urged 
the EPA to consider small distillers when the agency considers 
rules to protect our nation's water?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, we have, as you may know, we did comment 
on the WOTUS regulation. But more specifically, we have 
actually been to your state, the state of Kentucky, 3 years ago 
and toured many of the small business distilleries. So we have 
firsthand information, firsthand look-see as to how small 
businesses are making product and trying to remain economically 
viable.
    Mr. MCGARVEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Ms. SALAZAR. And now I recognize Mr. Meuser from 
Pennsylvania for 5 minutes.
    Mr. MEUSER. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Appreciate it.
    Mr. Clark, thank you very much for being with us. I am 
enjoying your testimony.
    So picking up on a few subjects that we started with 
regarding regulatory flexibility and such and your ability to 
have oversight and weigh in. This WOTUS ruling, for instance, 
that my colleague brought up.
    Now, I am not going to contend that Pennsylvania potatoes 
are more important than Kentucky bourbon but we are farmers too 
and deal with the WOTUS issue. I mean, 100 percent of them. So 
and not in a favorable manner. Now, if they were talked with 
and it was inclusionary how it was discussed and how we come up 
with the right plan for the environment and for farms and 
businesses that would make sense. Is that something that you 
take a role in, bringing people together so we get the right 
answers?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. Again, our responsibility as statute is to 
be the voice for small business. And one of the ways we do that 
is to try to bring all small businesses together to give us 
their input, their assessment. Because we don't have all of the 
answers. We need our small businesses to tell us very 
specifically how various proposed regulations may impact them. 
And not only how they may impact them but what they consider to 
be alternative and viable solutions to the problems.
    Mr. MEUSER. You have seen some of the reports, like the 
NFIB, for instance. I don't know if you work with them and gain 
information from them but, I mean, the attorney general of Iowa 
said that 97 percent of the land in Iowa would not be subject 
to federal regulation. I mean, that sounds pretty excessive. 
And from what I know from on-the-ground information, that is 
something that needs to be looked at.
    As well as the discussion on energy. I mean, there is a 
right way to do things. There is a responsible way. There is an 
irresponsible way. I think our regulatory nature in our country 
at this point, and I know the Marselles-Shale region, for 
instance, where we have natural gas, there are many regulations 
that come out that hinder and suppress the ability to grow 
natural gas, which by the way is half the carbon emissions of 
oil and other fossil fuels. And yet, these regulations just 
seem to keep coming. So are fossil fuels in general, I mean, 
energy costs, is that something that your agency works on for 
the benefit of small business?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. We have three attorneys that are involved 
in that area. I will say, however, Congressman, that one of the 
things that has to be considered in the discussion of the 
regulation is that there are some regulations that do come out 
which are beyond the control of Advocacy to deal with and that 
is because of the way the statutes have been designed for those 
regulations. For example, an interim final regulation is really 
beyond our ability even though we have more recently been 
involved in trying to work with agencies on interim final 
regulations as they impact small businesses.
    Mr. MEUSER. Good to hear, sir.
    What about Scope 3 with manufacturers and any company that 
has to deal with Scope 3? And many, as you know, small 
businesses are preparing for Scope 3. It is just on public 
companies now but they are getting ready for it.
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. We have actually submitted a comment letter 
to the SEC as well as to the FAR counsel on this whole Scope 3 
issue, as well as, I believe, some Members of Congress have 
also submitted letters on the impact of Scope 3 on small 
business. So we are aware of that. We are following that. We 
are wanting to make sure that our small businesses are not 
unduly impacted by this process.
    Mr. MEUSER. Good. Well, I look forward to working with you 
on that because our focus is to advocate, as well, for small 
businesses.
    Do you think that some federal agencies overly certify 
their proposed regulations as stating that they will not 
substantially impact small businesses? Do you battle with some 
agencies on occasion, on their over certifying?
    Mr. CLARK. Our concern when an agency does, in fact, 
attempt to certify a regulation that that certification has a 
factual basis. And the factual basis should set forth the 
reasons why they feel that the impact is minimum or to no 
extent on small business. And when agencies fail to give us 
that factual basis we do bring it to their attention.
    Mr. MEUSER. Thank you. I have run out of time. Thanks for 
your service. Thanks for your work.
    I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you.
    And now we recognize Ms. Scholten from the state of 
Michigan for 5 minutes.
    Ms. SCHOLTEN. Thank you so much. Thank you, Madam Chair, 
and thank you, Mr. Clark for being here today.
    I am happy that we are focusing on this critically 
important issue and the SBA's Office of Advocacy. I think it is 
so important that the Committee highlight the oversight work 
and the work that your office does to streamline and make small 
businesses as efficient as possible. I could not agree more 
with what has been said today about how excessive regulation 
far too often hamstrings businesses.
    Mr. Clark, an important responsibility of your office is to 
submit public comment letters to regulatory agencies during the 
rulemaking process. Can you walk us through how Advocacy 
determines when to comment on a proposed rule? What are 
instances where the office has been successful in influencing 
agencies through submitting public comment letters?
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you. Yes.
    The Office of Advocacy, as I said, the regulatory part is 
made up of attorneys and we are involved across the board with 
the agencies in our specific areas. We work internally with the 
agency where possible to deal with the issues that they are 
trying to deal with and with the impact of the proposed 
regulation on small business. When we reach a point that we 
cannot agree on what the changes should be and the agency goes 
forward with its proposed regulation, at that point in time we 
do write a public comment letter highlighting the concerns that 
have been shared with us by small businesses and asking the 
agency to take action to modify its regulation as it impacts 
small business.
    I mean, an example of that if you like is with the 
Department of Defense which is part of my area with what is 
called the CMMC, the Cybersecurity Maturity Model for 
cybersecurity where we work with the agency on what they were 
proposing. It was going to have a tremendous impact on our 
small businesses in the defense industry. They tried to make 
some changes. Did not make sufficient changes. We wrote a 
comment letter and I think Members of Congress took action and 
that particular regulation was pulled. They are now back with a 
modified regulation and hopefully we are examining it. 
Hopefully it will be much better than what it was in terms of 
the negative impact that it was having on small businesses in 
our defense industry.
    Ms. SCHOLTEN. And you and your office will continue to 
follow through on that presumably to ensure that it is actually 
implemented in a more efficient and streamlined----
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. Yes. As a result of our involvement with 
the particular unit, they have actually reached out to me 
wanting input and so forth before they go forward. And that is 
one of the things that we tried to develop that relationship 
with the agencies so that we can give them firsthand 
information, firsthand input in the process.
    Ms. SCHOLTEN. Thank you. I think that smart, well-crafted 
regulations is what we are all after here. I know that I hear 
consistently from small business owners in my district that one 
of the most time-consuming things that they have to spend their 
time on is trying to discern overly complex regulations. In 
West Michigan and across the country, small businesses do not 
have access to attorneys, accountant, or other resources that 
they can lean on to help make sure that they are in compliance.
    Quickly, if you can, how do small businesses become aware 
of changes to federal rules? And what does your office do to 
make sure that businesses get that information and can work as 
much as they can without the resources of an attorney or an 
accountant to make sure they are in compliance?
    Mr. CLARK. We do several things in that regard. One, we 
publish on a weekly, daily basis really, what is called a 
regulatory alert. And as the regulations come out, as our 
attorneys have looked at the regulations to make some 
determinations, they publish on our website this regulatory 
alert to alert the small business community of the proposed 
regulation. We also, as I mentioned earlier, have regional 
advocates. And one of the things that we encourage our regional 
advocates to do is to push that proposed regulation to their 
stakeholders in the various states that they operate in. But we 
also reach out to other trade groups that we know have an 
interest in that. So we are trying as much as possible to 
spread the knowledge of the proposed regulation----
    Ms. SALAZAR. Your time is up.
    Mr. CLARK.--trying to get as much impact and input from our 
stakeholders. And depending----
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you. Your time is up. 52:18xxx few more 
minutes. So thank you.
    Ms. SCHOLTEN. Thank you, Madam.
    Ms. SALAZAR. So now I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    I am Maria Salazar. I represent the City of Miami and I 
thank you very much, Mr. Clark, for being here today. We, as a 
Committee, we appreciate the work you do as an independent 
voice.
    I was thinking when I was listening to your words that you 
have a very big job. You have a very big job. You are like the 
David against the Goliath. And all this overburdening of 
regulations coming from the federal government. And when I say 
that I come from the City of Miami, I represent 75 percent of 
my constituents are first generation Americans. Most of them do 
not speak English very well but they love the American system. 
And they are escaping countries where the government is all 
over them. So they are coming to the United States asking or 
yearning to be able to have their small shop, like you said, 
two or three employees. We are not talking about 500 employees. 
We are talking about three people or four people. But that is 
their American dream. And now that I am hearing is that the 
feds are not listening to you and they are crushing our people, 
our small business community.
    So my first question is, sir, how can we help you so we can 
help the people that I just described as soon as possible? What 
is it that we need to do, one step that we need to do right now 
in order to help you do a better job?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, one of the things that we have done over 
the period of time and as we have held what we call regional 
regulatory roundtables, and we have been very successful in 
getting our small businesses--one, two people shops, larger 
shops to come out.
    Ms. SALAZAR. What happens with that info?
    Mr. CLARK. Much more information, much more outreach in 
that regard where it is not an adversarial situation. It is us 
sharing information and helping to educate and helping the 
folks understand it is something that we would love to work 
with the Committee on in terms of the Members in your various 
districts to ensure that----
    Ms. SALAZAR. I get it. But you are telling me there is 
info. You are doing focus groups like we would say on 
television and that you are bringing all that info back to the 
mothership. And from what I am hearing, the feds are just not 
listening to you. And that is the main problem. You are an 
advocate for the small business group.
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. But it depends on the situation. When we 
were holding, and when we held our regional roundtables across 
the country about 2 years ago, we actually had agencies in 
attendance at those roundtables. And they heard firsthand from 
stakeholders, from small business stakeholders as to the issues 
that were impacting them. And they went back to their 
agencies----
    Ms. SALAZAR. With all due respect, sir, because of my time, 
give me just one way or one step that we could take as a 
Committee to help you stop this trend in the last 2 years when 
the Biden administration has been in power, there are the 
figures, $300 billion costing business and 200 million hours of 
additional paperwork. That is not the American dream.
    Mr. CLARK. Well, one way you can do it, again, as I said 
earlier, is to work with us in terms of outreach to our small 
businesses because small businesses represent 99 percent of all 
businesses in the country and our ability to reach all of them 
with the small staff that we have is impossible but----
    Ms. SALAZAR. In order to reach them for what reason you 
need to reach them? I am talking about reaching the federal 
agencies with respect to what you are saying.
    Mr. CLARK. Yeah. We need to reach them in order to 
understand how the regulations are impacting them.
    Ms. SALAZAR. But don't we know that already?
    Mr. CLARK. Sometimes----
    Ms. SALAZAR. We know that more regulation impacts them more 
adversely.
    Mr. CLARK. Sometimes we don't. For example, we talked about 
the minimum wage. Well, that minimum wage regulation has a 
different impact on different types of businesses. And that is 
the type of information that we need to be able to present back 
to the agency.
    Ms. SALAZAR. I have 30 more seconds.
    How is your relationship with Administrator Guzman? Your 
office is very close to the main office for the SBA. Is that 
good? Does that help you do your job better or it does not?
    Mr. CLARK. Our job is independent of SBA. That is what we 
do. We are independent of SBA even though physically we are 
very close to that office.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Right.
    Mr. CLARK. We carry out our responsibility as the statute 
requires us to do.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Okay. Thank you, sir. My time is up.
    I now recognize Mr. Golden from the state of Maine for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. GOLDEN. Thank you.
    Mr. Clark, the lobster fishery in Maine has a lot of 
federal regulations coming at it. I know we have worked with 
your office on a few relevant to 57:41xx whales, which by the 
way just recently a federal Appeals Court ruled that those 
regulations were based on flawed data and could lead to 
hundreds of thousands of jobs being lost in Maine. And so that 
was good news for the Main lobster fishery.
    I wanted to talk a little bit about offshore wind. So BOEM 
has published guidance on mitigating the impacts of offshore 
wind energy on fisheries, yet the Bureau is not required to do 
an RFA analysis. That being said, you filed public policy on 
BOEM's guidance and in the comments you said that BOEM must 
conduct an RFA analysis in its draft environmental assessments 
and environmental impact statements to ensure the agency, as 
well as developers, properly consider the impacts offshore wind 
development projects on small businesses. Can you talk a little 
bit about why you feel strongly that that is very important?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. We have, over the short period of time, had 
conversations with small businesses regarding this offshore 
situation. And there are businesses that are concerned that 
their businesses are going to be adversely harmed by the 
process. And there are other businesses that clearly see some 
opportunity for benefit from the process. So we think that the 
most efficient way for the agency to do this analysis is to do 
an RFA analysis to determine what the impacts may be. We have a 
lot of businesses that are adjacent to the shore and to the 
shoreline and so forth that feel they are going to be adversely 
harmed by the development of the offshore wind, while others 
feel that it may be an opportunity for them to develop a 
business but----
    Mr. GOLDEN. Do you know, sir, if BOEM has started to 
perform an RFA analysis or have they committed to you to do one 
in the future?
    Mr. CLARK. They have not yet committed to us but I think we 
submitted a letter last week to them requesting that this be 
done.
    Mr. GOLDEN. Good. Thank you.
    In your comment to BOEM you said that small businesses can 
be significantly impacted by offshore development projects. Why 
is it that BOEM is going forward with leases right now prior to 
finalizing the rule on mitigating these impacts?
    Mr. CLARK. I cannot address why they are going forward with 
it right at this moment.
    Mr. GOLDEN. Do you have concerns that they are?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. I mean, again, the concern is that we have 
small businesses that are what I would characterize as caught 
in the crosswinds of this whole process. And those small 
businesses need to better understand exactly what the 
parameters are for this process so that they can adjust, if 
necessary, their business model and so forth to better 
participate. These businesses, many of them, all of them, 
really, are the economic backbone of that whole process. So we 
need to make sure that they are adequately protected as much as 
possible.
    Mr. GOLDEN. Does your office pretty much exclusively just 
comment on concerns being raised by small businesses or do you 
ever propose steps that could be taken by federal agencies to 
mitigate their impacts of their regulations?
    Mr. CLARK. Our office, we will comment on the proposed 
regulation and we will give the agency the assessments that we 
have received from our stakeholders as we have held roundtables 
and other types of listening sessions. And where appropriate, 
we will try to work with the agency in terms of analyzing data 
that may be available to give a different or better impact 
assessment.
    Mr. GOLDEN. Well, I know one thing, that the lobster 
fishery, and these are all small businesses as you know, is 
seeking in Maine exclusion zones which would ensure that their 
fishing grounds are not impacted by offshore wind. I do not 
know if you have seen any of those proposals yet but I am sure 
you will be hearing more about it in the weeks and months ahead 
and it is something we would love to be in a conversation with 
your office about.
    Mr. CLARK. Yeah. I have not seen a proposal but I am sure 
the attorney that is working on those areas is very much 
involved in that process.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you.
    Now I recognize Mr. Stauber from Minnesota, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. STAUBER. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    On April 27, 2022, Small Business Administrator Guzman 
testified in front of this House Small Business Committee that 
she was ``not familiar'' with the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act, also known as SBREFA. I am ever wary 
of the regulatory burden imposed upon small businesses. As part 
of the Committee's ongoing work to conduct oversight of small 
business concerns, it is important that we ensure this gap of 
knowledge on the federal regulatory process does not extend 
beyond the administrator and that our small businesses are 
being duly considered by other federal agencies. However, what 
I fear is that it is not a lack of knowledge that is keeping 
the concerns of small businesses out of consideration and 
federal agency rulemakings but rather an honest contempt held 
for main street by this administration. As an example, almost 
$300 billion, that is with a B, $300 billion of additional 
regulations on our small businesses and farmers by this 
administration in just 2-1/2 years.
    Now to my question. EPA recently proposed greenhouse gas 
regulations that would require existing coal and natural gas 
power plants and new natural gas power plants to install carbon 
capture or coal fire hydrogen. Many small entity electric 
utilities, notably electric cooperatives and public power 
utilities, which are prevalent in the district that I 
represent, will continue to rely upon coal and natural gas, 
including new construction of natural gas units to maintain 
reliability and affordability.
    Major Clark, has the SBA Office of Advocacy been asked to 
weigh in on the estimated impact of EPA's proposed greenhouse 
regulations on these small utilities?
    Mr. CLARK. I think the attorney that represents that area 
has been working with EPA in that area. I do believe that we 
actually have been following that. I do not have all of the 
specific details. I would be happy to provide those to you. But 
we are very much aware of the impact greenhouse gas is having 
and will have in terms of those regulations.
    Mr. STAUBER. Would you agree that those regulations, the 
additional regulations applied would cost the citizens who 
consume that energy more money?
    Mr. CLARK. Without having the data available in front of me 
that is one of the areas that we would have to look at in terms 
of what the additional cost, if any, would be in that process. 
And that is part of what we do in the Office of Advocacy is to 
try to weigh the costs of these proposed regulations.
    Mr. STAUBER. Does the Office of Advocacy plan to engage on 
this rulemaking particularly during the current open comment 
period?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes.
    Mr. STAUBER. Okay. Would you be able to give this Committee 
the results of that when it is completed?
    Mr. CLARK. I would be happy to. All of our public comment 
letters are filed and I do think we submit our public comment 
letters to this Committee but we would be happy to do that.
    Mr. STAUBER. Thank you.
    Unfortunately, I believe the EPA has come to the inaccurate 
conclusion and improperly certified this rulemaking by 
determining it would not have a ``significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.'' I have heard from 
electric coops and public power utilities that this proposed 
rule will, in fact, have a significant impact on their 
operations and on the communities they serve. I encourage the 
Office of Advocacy to officially weigh in on these proposals. 
And I will work with you and my colleagues to hold the agencies 
accountable and ensure their compliance with RFA and SBREFA.
    And with that I appreciate your time here, Major Clark. And 
thank you for your service.
    And Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Mr. CLARK. And we look forward to working with you on that. 
Thank you.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you.
    And now I recognize Mr. Mfume from Maryland for 5 minutes.
    Mr. MFUME. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
    Mr. Clark, good to see you.
    Allow me a point of personal privilege, Madam Chair, and to 
be a little bit redundant. You heard earlier in Mr. Clark's 
introduction by the Chair that he was the staff director to 
this Committee back in the 1980s. Chaired, the Committee was, 
by my predecessor, whose portrait is on the wall down there, 
Congressman Perrin Mitchell of Maryland. And although Mr. Clark 
is being a little modest right now, the truth of the matter is 
he was one of the most respected Members of any staff on the 
Hill in those days, almost, and I do not want you to blush, but 
almost legendary. And for those of us who had a chance to know 
him and to watch the level and the quality of his work for this 
Committee, it just stays with us.
    I got on the Committee when I got here in 1987. Mr. Clark 
was serving, as I said, for my predecessor. Ronald Reagan was 
president. We were all younger men then, including Ronald 
Reagan. And I have had an opportunity over the years to kind of 
hear about him and hear about him. But it is an opportunity 
today for me to see you and to say thank you, again, for all of 
your work. We do not want things like that to sort of fade 
away, and I say that primarily for the staff that works this 
Committee today. It is a good opportunity to do good things and 
to go a long, long way.
    One of the things, Mr. Clark, I would like to do quickly is 
to get our opinion on antitrust regulations and how they are 
impacting businesses. We know that the Sherman Antitrust Act, 
the Federal Trade Communications Antitrust Act and Clayton 
Antitrust Act are the three real pillars that were put in place 
legislatively to help protect small businesses from the sort of 
antitrust things that we have seen. We all on this Committee 
know that small businesses are challenged with a lot of 
different things, not the least of which is the lack of access 
to capital, the lack of access to credit. That was the case 40 
years ago. It is still, unfortunately, the case today. And 
those businesses today, like then, need every tool possible I 
think to be able to fight back.
    Now, one of the biggest threats is market consolidation. So 
give lack of access to capital, lack of access to credit, 
antitrust needs and protections, market consolidation is 
really, in my opinion, something that we have got to make sure 
that we do not take our eye off of. And so whether it is 
controlling trusts that exist out here, and there are a number 
of controlling trusts, monopolies, price fixing, things of that 
nature make it very, very difficult. And then over all of that 
we have the notion of mergers and acquisitions that consolidate 
power in the hands of a few big corporate companies that are 
swallowing up market share repeatedly and almost out of 
control.
    So if you could take a few moments, and we do have a few 
moments, for you to sort of give us your thoughts on all of 
this and tell us how Advocacy is working with the FTC on 
antitrust issues and on the other issues that I have talked 
about. That would be very sufficient and I would appreciate 
your thoughts.
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you for your question.
    The merger and acquisition and consolidation of all of 
these things impact small businesses in many ways that you 
talked about. But one of the most specific impacts is with the 
supply chain. Small businesses rely very much on the ability to 
get their products from manufacturers, from wholesalers, and 
others and put them into the supply chain. And when we have 
these mergers and acquisitions, many times those supply chains 
are directly impacted and the relationships that many small 
businesses may have with those supply chains are directly 
impacted.
    If I may share with you an example. When I was out in the 
private sector we were involved in IT service and there were a 
couple of mergers and acquisitions that directly impacted our 
ability to get product that we were getting before to our 
customers. Some at point in time were the federal government. 
So when we look at this whole issue, one of the things that we 
have to be concerned with is what does this actually do to the 
99 percent small businesses that we have in the United States. 
And the more they are squeezed in terms of their ability to 
provide product to the consumer, provide product to their 
customers, the worse off the economy is in terms of that whole 
process.
    Mr. MEUSER. And speaking of being a squeeze, do you have 
any idea conceptually of to what extent the percentage of small 
businesses are being squeezed and ultimately put out of 
business because of these larger controlling interests that 
take over as a result of an acquisition or merger?
    Mr. CLARK. I do not have firsthand data at my fingertips on 
that. That is something that we would be happy to look at to 
see what the impact is as it relates to small business. But it 
is the mergers. It is the cost of money that many of these 
small businesses have to incur. And the increase in cost of 
money that occurs as a result of the acquisitions and mergers. 
So we will be happy to look at that and get back to the 
Committee on that.
    Mr. MEUSER. And if you could provide that. And if I may ask 
unanimous, Madam Chair, just for 10 other seconds, if you could 
also, as a subgrouping or title of that, let us know what that 
effect is on minority business enterprise also that would be 
good.
    Mr. CLARK. Yes, I will.
    Mr. MEUSER. Thank you.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Now I recognize Mr. Landsman from Ohio for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. LANDSMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Clark, thank you 
for being here. I appreciate all the work that you have done. 
Incredible career. I am sure you have done this so many times 
that this is easy but I suspect that testifying in front of a 
Congressional Committee is not always the most fun, so we do 
appreciate you coming today and being part of this 
conversation.
    My questions are really around what outreach looks like. 
For context, I think we oftentimes offer incredible services or 
we have really important information where we trip up. And this 
is government, business, elected officials. We get tripped up 
on the outreach piece. I think we are struggling, even with 
social media, to figure out exactly how best to reach people. 
And so I am really curious about how you approach that 
generally.
    But in particular, and this is my second question is around 
childcare. I am a huge, huge believer in the role that 
childcare plays in our economy. They are almost all small 
businesses. Most of the time, at least in my city, these are 
black-owned businesses and they get left out of the 
conversation in terms of small businesses even though they are 
a small business providing incredible support to small 
businesses. So I am curious about the outreach to childcare 
providers.
    And then you all do economic reports, and I may be 
describing that wrong, but economic research report. And I am 
wondering if you have one or would be willing to do one on 
childcare as we try to learn more about how to best engage them 
generally as it relates to rulemaking, how these rules affect 
them but bigger picture, just how we engage them so that they 
are part of that small business ecosystem.
    Mr. CLARK. Congressman, thank you for your question. And 
yes, we would be happy to look at the possibility of doing an 
economic report, research report on child care. I do not know 
what the data field looks like that is out there but we would 
look at the data field and try to put together this type of 
report.
    But we have over the period of time been involved with 
childcare facilities and working with childcare companies in 
terms of the excellent job that they do in terms of protecting 
our children, working and caring for our children while we are 
out trying to make a living for the family.
    Three years ago when we were in Atlanta for a regional 
roundtable we attended or participated and we had a childcare 
facility participate in two roundtables that we had during that 
period of time showing us exactly what they do, how they do it, 
and sharing with us some of the issues that they were 
experiencing in child care. So we are aware of some of those 
issues. We will continue to look at the issue of childcare 
research report and see exactly what's there that we can 
provide that makes good sense in terms of an economic research 
report.
    Mr. LANDSMAN. Thank you. And again, I appreciate your 
service. Everything you do. Being here today.
    Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you.
    Now we recognize Mr. Thanedar from Michigan for 5 minutes.
    Mr. THANEDAR. Thank you, Madam Chair. And Mr. Clark, thank 
you for all your good service.
    As a small business owner and entrepreneur, I personally 
wrote a grant for small business innovation research. I know 
you worked with SBIR in the past. And I won an award that 
helped me with my small business.
    I do recognize, you know, the small businesses in my 
district, I represent Detroit and the downriver communities and 
the small businesses are struggling with inflation, trying to 
acquire enough customer base, keep the revenues up so they can 
keep the payroll and hopefully have a little bit of money left 
over for their own personal use or investing in their small 
businesses.
    I want smart regulation. I want regulations that help in 
safety and help in health and safety issues. I want regulations 
that help protect workers and protect workers' rights. So there 
is good rulemaking and there is bad rulemaking. Sometimes the 
rules are so complex that the little shops, mom and pop shops 
do not have the time to go through all this maze of 
requirements and the time commitment that they have to put.
    My question to you is how can we ensure that there is less 
paperwork, less work on the part of the business owner to deal 
with this? How do we communicate these changes in rules? People 
are so busy running their small businesses and do not have the 
time to find out all about it. How do we train them? How do we 
communicate with them? How do we help them to deal with these 
changes? And how does that affect also many of the Black and 
Brown business owners in my district?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, again, one of the things that we attempt 
to do is to do outreach. And in doing outreach, what we are 
trying to do is to, and what we do, we are not just trying, but 
what we do is to try to convey to the small businesses what the 
proposed regulation is designed to do. And in that regard what 
we then seek from that small business is some input as to how 
that will impact them. So if we look at, for example, things 
like the amount of time that it takes to perform a particular 
task that the regulation is calling for. And if the agency has 
underestimated that time and the small business tells us, well, 
it takes 2 hours longer than what the agency has proposed, then 
we share that with that agency and we put a cost factor to that 
particular situation. So what we attempt to do, again, is to 
bring that information to the agency because, again, a 
regulation, the agency will sometimes look at a regulation as 
one size fitting all. But regulations have a different impact 
on the different size of businesses and therefore, we are very 
concerned with that one, two, three, four-person shop where 
that regulation of compliance may cost a larger business only 
$5 to comply but that small business has to pay $100 just to be 
in compliance. So those are some of the things that we look at 
in terms of the cost of regulation and what's necessary for 
compliance.
    Mr. THANEDAR. You know, thank you so much for that.
    Recently, I have been starting AI, the artificial 
intelligence technology and I have seen some really interesting 
applications of that. Can such technology or similar technology 
can be used to make it easier, quicker for small businesses to 
be able to respond to these regulations?
    Mr. CLARK. Well, I, too, have looked at AI, and I think the 
answer probably to your question is yes. But I think we have to 
be very, very careful with AI, as we have to be careful with 
any technology because the misapplication of that technology 
can have a worse impact on that small business than what we are 
looking at. So we have to look at the aspects of that and what 
is really required and so forth and that is something that we 
are just doing now.
    Mr. THANEDAR. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Thank you.
    And now I recognize Ms. Chu from California for 5 minutes.
    Ms. CHU. Thank you.
    Mr. Clark, I want to commend you and the SBA Office of 
Advocacy for your important work ensuring federal agencies hear 
and consider the needs of small businesses when developing 
federal regulations.
    However, we know that the smallest and most underserved 
businesses such as sole proprietors, minority, or women-owned 
businesses and firms in low-income areas are often hard to 
reach and less likely to have the resources to advocate for 
themselves the way larger businesses do. That is why I am so 
glad to hear that Advocacy is continuing post-pandemic to do 
your roundtables online which you note has led to greater 
participation by businesses than in the past would have gone 
unnoticed or would have been unable to travel to D.C. to 
participate.
    So I would like to hear more about specifically what your 
office is doing to ensure that you are finding and hearing the 
voices of the most underserved businesses. When Advocacy plans 
these virtual roundtables and engages in other forms of 
outreach to small businesses, how are you ensuring that the 
smallest and most underserved small businesses are being 
reached like what I said--sole proprietors, minority- or women-
owned businesses, firms in low income areas, or limited 
English-proficient businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you very much.
    One of the things we do, we utilize very extensively our 
regional advocates that are assigned to each region and to the 
various states that they operate within. But in addition to the 
regional advocates, we actually attempt to go to the local 
community and try to engage the local leadership in our attempt 
to reach out to the businesses within their jurisdiction. So we 
clearly are aware that different groups have different levels 
of activity and different interests, so we try to reach out to 
those local organizations that are there to ensure that they 
can get their membership to participate in the hearings, in the 
roundtables, and so forth.
    Ms. CHU. How about on the limited proficient English front?
    Mr. CLARK. I'm sorry?
    Ms. CHU. Limited English proficient, like those who are 
monolingual in other languages?
    Mr. CLARK. We utilize multiple languages to reach out to 
the various communities that we are trying to reach out to. And 
we are not specific to any one specific language. We recognize 
that there are multiple groups out here with different 
languages and so forth. We have gone to Alaska reaching out to 
the different groups there and other places.
    Ms. CHU. Okay. Mr. Clark, I understand that only a few 
federal agencies are required to conduct Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act panels (SBREFA) which 
convene agency officials, the SBA Office of Advocacy and Small 
Businesses together to discuss the impact of a proposed 
rulemaking on small businesses and to make recommendations. Can 
you discuss the process by which small businesses are 
identified for participation in these SBREFA panels? 
Specifically, are there mechanisms that you use to ensure the 
participation of underserved firms like what I have talked 
about--sole proprietors, minority- and women-owned, those in 
low-income areas, limited English-proficient businesses?
    Mr. CLARK. Yes. Each of the agencies that are required to 
do a SBREFA panel has a different type of process of reaching 
out to the various communities. But one of the things that we 
are required to do with the agency and with OIRA is to ensure 
that the representation on the panels is adequate 
representation. And we will provide the agency in many of those 
situations with names of potential small businesses to 
participate on those panels.
    Ms. CHU. Do you track the participation of those that are 
in these underrepresented categories?
    Mr. CLARK. We track in terms of the types of issues that 
the agency is looking at in terms of those categories. Yes. We 
try to get a balanced participation of individuals from the 
small business community on the panels.
    Ms. CHU. Thank you. I yield back.
    Ms. SALAZAR. Mr. Clark, thank you for your presence here 
today and we, as the Committee, we appreciate the work that you 
do as an independent voice and advocate for small businesses 
across the country. You have an impressive resume as other 
Members have explained that highlight a long career both in the 
public sector and the private sector working with small 
businesses and the issues that affect them. So again, thank you 
for your time and for your service to the country.
    So I would like to thank once again the witness.
    And without objection, Members have 5 legislative days to 
submit additional materials and written questions for the 
witness to the Chair which will be forwarded to the witness. I 
will ask the witness to please respond promptly.
    If there is no further business, without objection the 
Committee is adjourned. Thanks again.
    Mr. CLARK. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 11:27 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]


                         A P P E N D I X


            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                             [all]