[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 75 (Tuesday, May 2, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Page S2663]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                        Congressional Review Act

  Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to 
highlight what I consider an unsung achievement of this administration 
and this Congress--the slow but steady rollback of the last 
administration's midnight regulations.
  The numbers are impressive. Using the Congressional Review Act, we 
have repealed 13 regulations so far, which adds up to a $3.6 billion 
reduction in regulatory costs. To put it in more human terms, we have 
saved the American people 4.2 million hours of paperwork, which I can 
tell you is more than welcome news in Arkansas.
  The other thing about these resolutions we have passed is that they 
are permanent. We haven't simply put these regulations on pause for a 
future President to revive them with a pen and phone. No, we have 
outlawed them forever. Any President who wants to reimpose them and 
their huge costs will have to pass a new law to do so, making the rules 
we live under and the people who make them accountable to the voters. 
That is a bit of a foreign concept to the people in Washington these 
days. But the way I see it, that is all the more reason to celebrate 
what we have achieved.
  I know the other side will say: This is a dark day for America. To 
hear them tell it, blotting out all these regulations will leave a dark 
stain on our law books. To them, this rollback is a throwback to a 
dangerous, rough-and-tumble era--one filled with dirty air, dirty 
water, and a frighteningly low quality of life. But it just ain't so.
  Stop and take a look at the regulations we have repealed, and then 
ask yourself: Why should Washington decide how we evaluate our 
teachers? Shouldn't parents, States, and cities do that? Why shouldn't 
States be able to test for drugs before handing out unemployment 
insurance? Is that such an unreasonable request? Why are bureaucrats 
who are sitting in an office thousands of miles away managing our land 
and wildlife? Shouldn't it be the people who live right there?
  Why should Federal bureaucrats be able to override a law duly passed 
by Congress and signed by the President? Do any of these regulations 
add much to our quality of life?
  Is this really about protecting the public interest? Or is it more 
about rewarding special interests? In fact, I can understand why 
liberals are bewildered at the idea that all these rules are hurting 
jobs, because these rules certainly are creating jobs--for lawyers and 
lobbyists. If there had been a bill, it would have been called ``The 
American Bar Association Full Employment Act.''
  That, perhaps, is the real issue here. It is not a question of 
whether we are going to live under rules. We have rules--plenty of 
them. The question is this: What kinds of rules are we going to live 
under? Are we going to pass laws that impose costs on rural America, 
only to add more wealth to urban America? Are we going to kill blue-
collar jobs so we can create more white-collar jobs? Or are we going to 
pass laws that help all Americans in all walks of life, as we should?
  When you look at things this way, I would say we have scored a pretty 
impressive victory, indeed, over these last 3 months.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican whip.