[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 71 (Wednesday, May 19, 2004)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E921]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           PAPERWORK AND REGULATORY IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2004

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. RUSH D. HOLT

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, May 18, 2004

  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 2432. Like so 
many other bills that have come the House floor recently, this one has 
a good title that belies its real substance. The paperwork and 
regulatory burdens on businesses could certainly use improvement, but 
this bill is actually an underhanded way to weaken so many important 
regulations that protect American citizens by giving us clean air, 
clean water, protected public lands, and safe workplaces.
  It is ironic that, even as we operate under one of the most industry-
friendly administrations in recent history, the paperwork burden on the 
average American businessman has actually gone up. In fiscal year 2003, 
total government paperwork reached an estimated 8.1 billion hours. 
According to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the 
paperwork burden rose a record 570 million hours in fiscal year 2002 
and another 72 million hours in fiscal year 2003.
  So even as the Bush administration and the House leadership dole out 
special interest goodies to oil and gas companies, HMOs, and many 
others, the paperwork burden for businesses is going up. The bill we 
have in front of us will not relieve that burden or do anything to undo 
the sharp increase in paperwork that we have seen from this White 
House. Instead, it weakens the process of developing federal 
regulations that protect the health and safety of Americans and our 
natural environment.
  It is also ironic that the House leadership has chosen to attack 
environmental regulations as imposing undue burdens on businesses when 
our laws and regulations still do not fully account for externalities 
like pollution. Polluting industries may decry the costs of burdensome 
government regulations, but it is average citizens who pay the real 
price when they breathe dirty air and drink polluted water.
  Some reports have concluded that my home state of New Jersey has the 
worst air quality in the nation. So it is hard for me, and for my 
constituents, to tolerate the cries of the power industries when their 
pollution leads to the premature deaths of so many New Jerseyans. I am 
outraged when the Bush administration insists on rewriting 
environmental regulations to pad the profits of polluters and ignores 
the human costs of pollution.
  There is a real danger with the details in this legislation, 
especially concerning environmental and health regulations. The bill 
directs OMB to have every federal agency provide an annual report 
estimating the total costs and benefits of regulations and paperwork 
pertaining to that agency. So the agency measures the costs, say, of 
installing pollution controls on a power plant and filling out the 
relevant paperwork. When it comes to measuring the benefits of a given 
pollution control regulation, however, are we going to include the 
value of premature deaths avoided and reduced asthma rates? I sincerely 
doubt that most federal agencies are going to be inclined, or even be 
able, to estimate such external benefits.
  As a research scientist. I am also concerned that the bill does not 
require the cost-benefit analyses to be done using rigorous scientific 
analysis. If we want to seriously look at the real costs and benefits 
of our regulations, we need to use scientific methods, or we risk using 
complete speculation. This Administration has already undermined and 
ignored science numerous times--let's not give them another 
opportunity.
  I understand the burden that many businesses, especially small 
businesses, face in filling out government paperwork. This bill, 
however, is more about coming up with excuses to undermine vital 
health, safety, and environmental regulations than about relieving the 
evergrowing paperwork burden.

                          ____________________