[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 13, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
 STATUS REPORT ON EFFORTS TO STRENGTHEN THE REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
February 11, 1994, and June 10, 1994, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Ewing] is recognized during morning business for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EWING. Mr. Speaker, I am taking this time to bring my colleagues 
up to date on our efforts to put some teeth into the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.
  As my colleagues will recall, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, passed 
in 1980, requires Federal regulators to find ways to minimize the 
impact of regulations on small businesses and local governments. 
However, because judicial review is prohibited, most agencies ignore 
the RFA. Over 250 bipartisan House Members have cosponsored my 
legislation to allow judicial review of the RFA.
  Last spring, Senator Wallop passed an amendment to the National 
Competitiveness Act to allow judicial review of the RFA which is 
similar to our legislation. In July the House voted 380 to 36 to 
instruct conferees to accept judicial review of the RFA.

  Vice President Gore's National Performance Review has made judicial 
review of the RFA its No. 1 recommendation for the Small Business 
Administration. In a report released just a few weeks ago, the NPR 
said, ``Several administrative efforts have been made to improve the 
level of responsiveness to the RFA, but with little success. The 
fundamental solution is judicial review * * *'' The report also said, 
``A credible threat of lawsuits would give agencies a strong motive to 
ensure that the RFA is followed.''
  Despite this strong endorsement, some bureaucrats in the Clinton 
administration are ignoring the NPR recommendation and are trying to 
gut judicial review. The Clinton administration has ignored its own 
announced policy and has proposed a series of crippling restrictions on 
the ability of courts to enforce the RFA.
  For example, the administration wants to prohibit small businesses 
from filing an RFA suit against an agency unless they or their 
representatives had filed comments before the rule was finalized. They 
also want to prohibit judges from immediately staying a rule which 
violates the RFA. The Clinton administration has proposed several other 
restrictions on judicial review which would make the RFA as toothless 
as it is right now. None of these restrictions are contained in the 
NPR's recommendation.
  The administration proposal has been roundly rejected by the small 
business groups which comprise the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
Coalition. It would appear that the Clinton administration is more 
interested in pleasing a few bureaucrats in the OMB and the Justice 
Department than in reducing the burden of Federal regulations on small 
businesses and passing one of the NPR's recommendations.
  As conferees on the National Competitiveness Act meet I hope they 
will reject the Clinton administration's Reg Flex ruse and agree to 
full judicial review of the RFA, as endorsed by a vote of 380 to 36 in 
this House and recommended by the National Performance Review.

                          ____________________