[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 68 (Tuesday, April 26, 2022)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2141-S2142]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                     Nomination of Alvaro M. Bedoya

  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, if the nanny state had a mascot, it would be 
the Federal Trade Commission. In fact, back in the 1970s, the FTC 
earned the nickname the ``National Nanny''--this, after it went on a 
rulemaking binge, one that triggered an unprecedented congressional 
response.
  In response to that binge, Congress defunded the Agency for several 
days. In fact, it refused formally to reauthorize the Commission for 
some 14 years after that. Thankfully, the FTC changed approach by 
reining in its rulemaking initiatives. Congress, however, did not learn 
its lesson and has continued to grant the FTC broad powers over the 
years. These grants of power and the lack of congressional will have 
helped put the FTC on a trajectory that looks eerily similar to its 
``National Nanny'' era.
  Under the leadership of Lina Khan, the FTC has only accelerated into 
this trajectory and is now being transformed into a bigger and more 
invasive national nanny than ever could have been imagined in the 
1970s. Her vision is to transform what is an enforcement Agency into a 
broader, largely independent regulatory Agency. This move would reduce 
the congressional oversight of key economic regulation and would also 
have serious negative implications for countless businesses across the 
Nation that could find themselves subject to the whims of an unelected, 
arbitrary, capricious, out-of-control Agency. The FTC is on course to 
take significant new powers so that it can use its already broad 
authorities under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and 
elsewhere to regulate huge swaths of the American economy.
  We, accordingly, need to be very careful when considering nominees to 
the Commission.
  As a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, I took seriously my 
consideration of Mr. Bedoya's nomination and spoke with him on multiple 
occasions regarding his nomination and regarding his vision for the 
Federal Trade Commission. During his nomination hearing, I took careful 
note of my questions to Mr. Bedoya and to his responses to ascertain 
his vision for the Commission and his view on the scope of the FTC's 
power. His answers did little to calm my concerns. In fact, they did 
much to add to my worries, not only about his nomination but about the 
future of the Commission at large.
  During my questioning, Mr. Bedoya signaled that he would use section 
5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to conduct unfair methods of 
competition rulemaking. That, of course, would be a dangerous expansion 
of the FTC's rulemaking power, one that would occur without a 
congressional grant of authority.
  He refused to share his views on the FTC's repeal of its vertical 
merger guidelines.
  He didn't answer when I asked about his views on Lina Khan's use of 
zombie votes, or proxy votes, of ex-commissioners after they had left 
the Commission.

[[Page S2142]]

  He would not provide a clear answer on whether he supported Lina 
Khan's decision to remove key procedural requirements attached to FTC 
rulemaking--the very statutory, procedural requirements that were 
instituted in direct response to the Agency's flagrant abuses of its 
own power in the 1970s.
  And he openly supports Lina Khan's decision to close out the voice of 
minority commissioners to approve investigations--an action that has 
destroyed a bipartisan hallmark of the Commission.
  Mr. Bedoya did not earn my confidence in his hearing. His nomination 
is not designed to strengthen American business or bolster our economy. 
Instead, his nomination will give the Commission the majority it needs 
to take American economic regulation out of the hands of elected 
lawmakers.

  We have to remember that the very first clause of the very first 
section of the very first article of the Constitution says that all 
legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of 
the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of 
Representatives. In other words, all Federal lawmaking power--
legislative powers or lawmaking powers--the power to make Federal law 
as articulated in article I, section I, clause 1--is vested in 
Congress, not in an outside Agency.
  Article I, section VII puts even more clarity on it in explaining 
that, in order to pass a Federal law, you have got to have passage by 
the Senate and passage by the House of the same piece of legislation, 
followed by presentment to the President, resulting in signature, veto, 
or acquiescence. Without that, you cannot make a Federal law.
  When we pretend to make Federal lawmakers outside of Congress, we 
have got to be very careful because this is subversive of the entire 
purpose of the Constitution, putting in the most dangerous power--the 
power to make prescriptive laws, the power to make laws adding to, 
altering, materially changing the obligations of members of the public. 
You have got to go through the branch of government that is most 
accountable to the people at the most regular intervals.
  That is why this is so concerning that you have in Mr. Bedoya, like 
you have in Lina Khan, someone who doesn't fear this type of 
unaccountable, de facto lawmaking, not only outside of what the 
Constitution can countenance fairly but also outside of basic standards 
of accountability and good government.
  For all of these reasons, I fear that Mr. Bedoya will not only enable 
but will support the blatant attempts made by Lina Khan to return the 
FTC to its status as the ``National Nanny'' and, ultimately, the 
national enemy.
  Under her leadership, the FTC has shown disregard for the input of 
minority commissioners and has been frustrated by the legal limits 
surrounding the FTC's authority. Lina Khan is not afraid to lead the 
Agency on a path that ignores legal, constitutional, and procedural 
roadblocks in its way.
  I am committed to reversing the dangerous trajectory of the FTC; to 
making sure that we don't return to the 1970s era of the FTC's being 
the nanny of the nanny state; and to making sure that we restore the 
FTC's accountability to Congress and, ultimately, to the people.
  We have to remember that true accountability in our system of 
government--accountability related to what the law is and how the law 
is written--always has to be with Congress. That is why article I is 
written the way that it is. It is why this is something that has to be 
understood appropriately as a nondelegable duty--that is, the power to 
make law.
  We have got to restore that accountability, and I fear that Mr. 
Bedoya will only further enable the radical takeover of the Federal 
Trade Commission. I, therefore, cannot and will not support his 
nomination.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________