[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 69 (Thursday, May 22, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1031]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  THE INTRODUCTION OF THE CONGRESSIONAL OFFICE OF REGULATORY ANALYSIS 
                              CREATION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. SUE W. KELLY

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 22, 1997

  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing legislation that will 
greatly assist this body in obtaining information that it can use to 
fulfill its responsibilities under the Congressional Review Act. My 
legislation would create a Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis, 
or CORA, whose sole purpose would be to provide Congress substantive 
information on the potential impact of new regulations on our Nation's 
small business.
  In March 1996, the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
[SBREFA] was enacted. Contained within this legislation is an often 
overlooked, but nevertheless significant, provision that gives Congress 
the authority to prevent new Federal regulations from taking effect. 
This new regulatory disapproval authority is designed to allow Congress 
to become a more active participant in the regulatory process.
  Members of Congress have often protested that Federal agencies 
routinely promulgate regulations that exceed their legal authority. 
Given these complaints, and the fact that the regulatory burden has 
become unbearably large, one would expect that Congress would be 
vigorously employing its powers under the Congressional Review Act. 
However, in practice, the exact opposite is true. As of May 21, 1997, 
roughly 14 months after the Congressional Review Act became effective, 
4,574 nonmajor final rules have been submitted to GAO and Congress, and 
72 major rules, on which GAO is required to submit a statement to 
Congress, have been issued. Yet, not a single resolution of disapproval 
has been passed. The House of Representatives has failed even to 
consider one such resolution.
  In my opinion, this is not how the Congressional Review Act was 
designed to operate. Congress must use its authority to exercise 
stronger oversight of the regulatory state. Before I describe the 
responsibilities of CORA, however, I would like to make one point very 
clear: this initiative is not based on the assumption that all 
regulations are bad. Some regulations have been instrumental in 
protecting our environment and ensuring the safety of millions of 
American workers. These efforts should not be weakened, and it is not 
the intent of this legislation to do so.
  Having said that, let me explain more fully what CORA is designed to 
do. Under my bill, a new legislative support office, called the 
Congressional Office of Regulatory Analysis, would be created. Why is 
such an office needed? As discussed above, the Congressional Review Act 
is simply not being implemented. The executive branch continues to 
churn out new regulations at a staggering pace. In most cases, the only 
information that Members of Congress have available to them regarding a 
regulation is that which is provided by the promulgating agency. As we 
all know, Federal agencies are required to complete a number of reports 
and analyses on rules that they are promulgating. A problem exists, 
however, because agencies often ignore these requirements, or fail to 
thoroughly comply with them. Aside from what an agency may provide, 
there is no other source of information that Congress can rely upon. 
CORA's sole purpose would be to analyze new agency regulations to help 
Congress determine whether the use of its disapproval authority under 
the Congressional Review Act would be warranted.
  How would the Office operate? Under current law, virtually all new 
regulations are required to be filed with Comptroller General of the 
General Accounting Office and each House of Congress. The Comptroller 
General has unique responsibilities if these regulations are determined 
to be major. A major rule, whose determination is made by the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, is 
defined as a rule that will likely have an annual effect on the economy 
of $100 million or more. In these instances, GAO is required to submit 
a report to the committees of jurisdiction by the end of 15 calendar 
days containing an assessment of the agency's compliance with the 
procedural steps required by various statutes and executive orders 
relating to the regulatory process. The usefulness of these reports, 
however, is minimal because they simply assess procedural steps taken 
by an agency, and do not at all address the substance of the 
regulation. As a result, they do little to assist Members of Congress 
determine the merits of the rule itself.
  This would change under my legislation. Initially, the functions now 
designated to the General Accounting Office would be transferred to 
CORA. In addition to the report on an agency's compliance with 
procedural steps, CORA would also perform its own regulatory impact 
analysis of major rules. Such an analysis would provide a second 
opinion on the agency's actions and provide Members with a substantive 
assessment of the impact the regulation is likely to have. This 
information could then be used to facilitate use of the Congressional 
Review Act.
  In addition, CORA could also conduct regulatory impact analyses of 
nonmajor rules. Currently, there is no type of review of these 
regulations by GAO or anyone else. CORA would undertake these analyses 
at the request of a committee or individual Member, based on a priority 
system established within the legislation and the discretion of the 
Director of the Office. Under such a system, CORA could analyze 
important nonmajor rules using limited budgetary resources.
  Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, the Congressional Budget 
Office also has certain regulatory analysis functions. CBO is required 
to estimate the costs of regulations that may be needed to implement a 
particular piece of legislation. Upon request, CBO is also required to 
compare its estimate with that of the agency promulgating the rule. 
Because CORA would be the repository of regulatory information for 
Congress, it would be appropriate for CORA to assume this function.
  Mr. Speaker, Congress needs accurate, reliable, nonpartisan 
information that it can use to assess new regulations. A source for 
such information does not currently exist. My legislation would create 
a small, inexpensive, and focused office within the legislative branch 
that could provide such information. It would consolidate and 
centralize such a function, and greatly facilitate effective 
implementation of the Congressional Review Act. With the annual cost to 
our economy of Federal regulations estimated at roughly $700 billion 
and growing, how can we afford not to have such an office?
  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

                          ____________________