[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 193 (Thursday, December 15, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        STATEMENT REGARDING H.R. 10, REINS ACT, DECEMBER 7, 2011

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. BETTY McCOLLUM

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, December 15, 2011

  Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly oppose the REINS Act 
(H.R. 10). This reckless legislation would put American families at 
risk while doing nothing to create jobs.
  If enacted, H.R. 10 would delay and possibly block agency rulemaking 
in critical areas of public health and safety. This legislation would 
require that any ``major'' new rule be approved by Congress and the 
President within 70 legislative days. If Congress fails to act by the 
deadline, the proposed rule could not be reviewed again until the next 
Congress. My Republican colleagues do not deny this cumbersome process 
would prevent many new rules from taking effect. They argue preventing 
new rules is necessary to stimulate hiring and strengthen the economy.
  The House Republican majority has used similar justifications to 
undermine existing regulations that create a level-playing field for 
business and protect the health and safety of American families. 
Earlier this month, Republicans passed the Regulatory Flexibility 
Improvements Act (H.R. 527) and Regulatory Accountability Act (H.R. 
3010). These bills add new layers of bureaucracy intended to hamper 
enforcement of important environmental, labor, financial and food 
safety laws.
  Evidence does not support Republican claims that federal regulation 
is to blame for persistently-high unemployment. According to the Bureau 
of Labor Statistics (BLS), only 0.3 percent of Americans laid off in 
2010 lost their jobs due to ``government regulations.'' In 2011, the 
BLS found even fewer layoffs attributable to regulations--0.18 percent. 
A McClatchy News survey of small businesses in August 2011 did not 
identify a single business owner who complained about regulation in 
their industry. In fact, McClatchy reported that ``most seemed to 
welcome it and some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage 
lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about 
the Great Recession of 2007-9 and its grim aftermath.''
  Bruce Bartlett, a former advisor to Republican Presidents Ronald 
Reagan and George H.W. Bush, said congressional Republicans' anti-
regulatory fervor has nothing to do with jobs. Bartlett recently wrote: 
``Regulatory uncertainty is a canard invented by Republicans that 
allows them to use current economic problems to pursue an agenda 
supported by the business community year in and year out. In other 
words, it is a simple case of political opportunism, not a serious 
effort to deal with high unemployment.''
  Economists from across the political spectrum agree the real 
impediment to hiring is weak demand in the economy. Increasing demand 
is the focus of President Obama's proposed American Jobs Act, which 
independent economists say would create over 1 million jobs. Despite 
the jobs crisis facing over 14 million Americans, House Republican 
leaders refuse to bring the American Jobs Act to the floor for a vote.
  H.R. 10 and other anti-regulatory bills will not only fail to create 
jobs, they expose American families and small businesses to new and 
unnecessary risks. President Obama has threatened to veto the bill, 
arguing it would ``delay and in many cases thwart'' implementation of 
important rules and increase unnecessary confusion and uncertainty in 
the economy. The Coalition for Sensible Safeguards warns that H.R. 10 
``would make it virtually impossible for federal agencies to ensure 
that American families are protected from tainted food, unsafe drugs, 
predatory financial schemes, dirty air and water, and dangerous 
workplaces.''
  Abandoning Americans to an unregulated marketplace is not a solution 
for economic growth--it is a sure threat to public safety. In recent 
years, many Americans have died as a result of E.coli and salmonella 
outbreaks in our food supply. A failure to enforce federal workplace 
safety standards resulted in the tragic deaths of 29 miners in West 
Virginia. Under-regulation allowed irresponsible bankers and mortgage 
lenders to destroy the education and retirement savings of millions of 
Americans. America is, in fact, facing a regulatory crisis. Not the 
crisis of ``over-regulation'' my Republican colleagues claim, but a 
series of crises resulting from a failure to enforce and enact common-
sense rules.
  Sensible regulation is necessary for an efficient, fair and 
innovative private market. But we should not be surprised that industry 
will not always support--and rarely ask--to be regulated. History shows 
that industry groups initially opposed new requirements for seat belts 
and air bags, limitations on mercury pollution and even restrictions 
against child labor. In the short-term, narrow private interests often 
conflict with the broader public interest. Over time, well-designed and 
consistently-enforced rules often prove to be less costly and more 
beneficial than originally expected.
  Democrats and Republicans should be working together to improve the 
federal regulatory structure. Our shared focus in Congress should be on 
reforming regulations to increase results and reduce costs. Partisan 
attempts to weaken common sense rules and protections will not make our 
economy--or our country--stronger.
  I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 10 because it undermines public 
safety and distracts Congress from the urgent task of creating jobs.

                          ____________________