[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 121 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1191]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     REGULATIONS FROM THE EXECUTIVE IN NEED OF SCRUTINY ACT OF 2015

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                          HON. TERRI A. SEWELL

                               of alabama

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 28, 2015

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the state of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 427) to 
     amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide 
     that major rules of the executive branch shall have no force 
     or effect unless a joint resolution of approval is enacted 
     into law:

  Ms. SEWELL of Alabama. Mr. Chair, yesterday, the House voted on H.R. 
427, Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2015. I 
was unavoidably detained, but if I had been present, I would have 
opposed this legislation. While the bill claims to accomplish well-
meaning goals such as increasing ``accountability for and transparency 
in the federal regulatory process,'' it only threatens the historic 
separation of legislative and executive powers.
  By requiring a joint resolution of approval from Congress before any 
``major'' rules set forth by a federal agency come into effect, the 
REINS act attempts to undermine executive power and expand 
congressional regulatory authority. This partisan bill is a thinly 
vailed attempt to score political points by attacking the Obama 
Administration. And as Republican leaders take another ideological 
swipe at the Obama administration, a number of more pressing issues go 
unaddressed, especially as we leave for our District Work Period.
  Second-guessing agency standards and rules that are supposed to be 
governed by Congressional laws is not only redundant but is reflective 
of the Republican's relentless pursuit of removing important and 
necessary regulations. Given that the bill also has a 70-day 
requirement to approve any new standards, the potential for delays in 
enacting public safeguards is steep, particularly if bipartisan 
coalitions can't quickly draft joint resolutions.
  We have seen efforts to push this legislation through three times 
previously, and each time it has failed to pass both houses. I urge my 
fellow Members of Congress to reject this harmful piece of legislation 
once more.

                          ____________________