[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 155 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2201]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           H.R. 2840 THE REGULATORY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT OF 1997

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. TOM BLILEY

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, November 6, 1997

  Mr. BLILEY. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing H.R. 2840, the 
Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 1997. The Regulatory Right-to-Know Act 
of 1997 provides an important tool to understand the magnitude and 
impact of Federal regulatory programs on our economy. Recently, the 
President and Congress devoted a great deal of time and effort in 
preparing and debating the first balanced budget for the Federal 
Government in 28 years. This budget determines how much money the 
American people's Government will collect and where it will spend these 
funds. The budget for fiscal year 1997 is approximately $1.6 trillion.
  However, the Federal budget fails to take into account the full 
impact of Federal programs on our economy. The Federal Government also 
imposes tremendous costs on the private sector, State and local 
governments and, ultimately, the public through ever-increasing Federal 
regulations. Some recent estimates place the compliance costs from 
Federal regulatory programs at over $680 billion annually and project 
substantial growth even without new legislation. These costs are often 
hidden in increased prices for goods and services, loss of 
international competitiveness in the global economy, lack of investment 
in private sector job growth, and pressure on the ability of State and 
local governments to fund essential services, such as crime prevention 
and education.
  The benefits of Federal programs are no doubt substantial. Lack of 
accountability and regulatory reform, however, has left many Federal 
programs inefficient or marginally productive. Unlike the private 
sector, where freedom of contract and free market competition drive 
price and quality, Federal programs are only accountable through the 
political process. Moreover, historically, both Congress and the 
executive branch have driven growth in Federal regulatory programs, 
creating layer upon layer of bureaucracy at great cost and with 
diminishing returns for the American people. If Congress and the 
executive branch do not take concrete steps to reform these programs, 
the United States will surely decline in the world economy. 
Consequently, the quality of life for our children will also decline.
  The Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 1997 is an important management 
tool to evaluate the cumulative impacts of regulatory programs through 
an accounting of national expenditures and statements of corresponding 
benefits for each regulatory program. The cumulative impact of 
regulatory costs must be debated at the same level that taxing and 
spending are debated; after all, they are all derived from the same two 
sources--the private sector and the American people. Rule-by-rule 
evaluations are insufficient to capture cumulative impacts or manage 
national expenditures. Moreover, a national debate that focuses solely 
on the $1.6 trillion Federal budget without accounting for the 
additional $680 billion in annual regulatory costs is an incomplete and 
uninformed debate that leads to poor national policy and mismanagement 
of resources.
  What is needed is an accounting tool that allows the Federal 
Government to fully understand the cumulative impact of Federal 
programs. The Regulatory Right-to-Know Act would provide such a tool. 
The bill requires the President to provide an accounting statement 
every 2 years respecting the costs of regulation to the private sector 
and State and local governments, and Federal Government costs by 
program or program element. The President would also provide 
quantitative or qualitative statements of corresponding benefits. Such 
an accounting offers the opportunity for comprehensive analyses of 
impacts on our economy through an associated report. The bill also 
provides for input from the public and opportunities to identify areas 
for regulatory reform.
  Citizens for a Sound Economy and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce agree 
that the American taxpayers and business have the right-to-know the 
costs and benefits of Federal regulations, and, therefore, have 
endorsed the Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 1997. I would like to 
submit letters of endorsement for the Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 
1997 from Citizens for a Sound Economy and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce 
into the Record.
  The legislation changes no regulatory standard or program. It will, 
however, provide vital information to Congress and the executive branch 
so they may fulfill their obligation to ensure wise expenditure of 
limited national economic resources in all regulatory programs.
  The letters follow:

                                                 November 4, 1997.
     Hon. Thomas J. Bliley,
     Chairman, Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Bliley: On behalf of Citizens for a Sound 
     Economy (CSE), a 250,000-member consumer advocacy and 
     research organization, I would like to express my strong 
     support for the ``Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 1997.'' 
     This legislation would help establish a more effective 
     approach toward regulation through increased public 
     accountability and much-needed public dialogue concerning the 
     costs and benefits of regulation.
       Americans currently face an estimated regulatory burden of 
     $680 billion annually. Increased accountability and a better 
     understanding of the regulatory process would improve Federal 
     regulations by providing Congress, the administration, and 
     Federal agencies the necessary information to more carefully 
     assess regulations.
       CSE will work to ensure that regulatory process became law. 
     The Regulatory Right-to-Know Act of 1997 is an important step 
     toward a more reasonable regulatory process. By providing the 
     public and the government more consistent information about 
     the costs and benefits of regulations, the Regulatory Right-
     to-Know Act will allow regulatory agencies to make more 
     informed decisions while avoiding excessive or unnecessary 
     burdens on consumers.
           Sincerely,

                                                   Matt Kibbe,

                                                   Vice President 
     for Public Policy.
                                  ____



                                              Chamber of Commerce,


                              of the United States of America,

                                                 November 3, 1997.
     Hon. Tom Bliley,
     Chairman, House Committee on Commerce, U.S. House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports 
     your proposed legislation to make permanent the regulatory 
     accounting statement of the cumulative costs and benefits of 
     federal regulatory programs.
       A proliferation of federal regulations has occurred in 
     recent years. Estimates now place the total cost of federal 
     regulations on American taxpayers and the regulated community 
     in excess of $700 billion annually. These costs are 
     particularly onerous for small businesses that simply do not 
     have the resources to comply with the increasing number of 
     demands imposed upon them. According to the U.S. Small 
     Business Administration, the proportionate cost of regulatory 
     compliance for small business is almost three times that for 
     large companies.
       American taxpayers and businesses deserve to know the total 
     costs and benefits of federal regulations. Adoption of your 
     legislation would inject greater accountability into the 
     regulatory process and facilitate better evaluation of 
     regulatory programs. It would also help in allocating limited 
     resources where the needs are the greatest. Requiring an 
     annual regulatory accounting statement has strong bipartisan 
     congressional support. It is time that it was made permanent.
       The U.S. Chamber of Commerce--the world's largest business 
     federation with an underlying membership of more than three 
     million businesses and organizations of every size, section 
     and region--applauds your efforts and urges expeditious 
     adoption of this common sense, good government proposal.
           Sincerely,
                                                  R. Bruce Josten.

     

                          ____________________