[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 187 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H7247-H7251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 115, MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 1616 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 1616
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 115) to
amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide
for en bloc consideration in resolutions of disapproval for
``midnight rules'', and for other purposes. All points of
order against consideration of the bill are waived. The
amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the
Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the bill shall be
considered as adopted. The bill, as amended, shall be
considered as read. All points of order against provisions in
the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall
be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any
further amendment thereto to final passage without
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally
divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective
designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Strong). The gentleman from Texas is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume.
During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the
purpose of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Texas?
There was no objection.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, last night the House Committee on Rules met
to report a rule providing for consideration of H.R. 115, the Midnight
Rules Relief Act under a closed rule. The rule provides for 1 hour of
general debate equally divided between the chair and ranking minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees.
It also provides one motion to recommit.
Mr. Speaker, first off, I will start today by saying thank you to
everyone who has prayed for our family and sent letters, flowers, and
best wishes over the past 2 weeks. Your thoughts and your prayers have
helped our family as we deal with an almost unimaginable crisis with
the loss of our beloved daughter, Christine. The support from everyone
in this body has been overwhelming, and I hope everyone knows that my
family appreciates the support. We met overwhelming grief with
overwhelming support, and for that I want to thank people.
With today possibly being the last time I manage this debate, and if
this body will indulge me, I will express my sincere gratitude for the
opportunity of a lifetime to serve as chairman of the exceptional Rules
Committee.
When I was first elected in 2003, I could never have imagined serving
in this capacity and performing such an important role in our
legislative process. Throughout my career, I have made a point of
always saying ``yes'' to a challenge. When Speaker Johnson called me, I
knew I had no choice but to accept. Serving on this committee,
[[Page H7248]]
let alone assuming the role of chairman, has not been an easy ride, and
the legislative process is not as smooth as what we learned in
``Schoolhouse Rock!,'' but it has only allowed me and my appreciation
for the House of Representatives to grow further. I am forever grateful
for the opportunity to serve as its chairman.
It has given me a front-row seat to history, and whether I agreed
with the decisions being made or not, this committee continues to be a
model for how Members conduct themselves in the House of
Representatives, respectful but ever-passionate, and I hope you all
continue with that strong and honorable tradition in the next year
because the American people have high expectations, but, frankly, they
deserve the best from us.
I also will take a moment and thank the Rules Committee itself, my
personal staff, the Rules Committee staff, who have worked so hard to
ensure that I am prepared every day and that this body can conduct its
work efficiently. For the past 22 years, I have been blessed to be
surrounded by an amazing, smart, and talented staff. Without each of
them, I would not have gotten to where I am today.
I thank my Republican colleagues for your continued commitment to
prioritizing legislation that is always in the best interest of
Americans. You all have a tall order next year, but having gotten to
know each of you over my time here, I have every bit of confidence that
this House is up to the task.
I appreciate Mr. Speaker's indulgence, and now we will get on to the
business at hand.
Yesterday, the Rules Committee met to report on a rule providing for
consideration of legislation that is as timely as it is fundamental to
our constitutional checks and balances. The Congressional Review Act,
or CRA, provides the primary legislative check on regulatory overreach
by allowing Congress to reverse a rule by resolution. However, that is
a single rule, and Congress' ability to keep up with these new
regulations is constrained by its ability to write and pass new bills
as fast as an administration can send them out with trillions of
taxpayer dollars and resources at their disposal.
Administrations of both political parties tend to overwhelm Congress
at the end of their term with hundreds of new rules. These are known as
midnight rules, representing billions of dollars of new regulatory
burden in the span of just a few short weeks. Congress has historically
struggled to keep pace. The executive branch has exploited the
inefficiency of the Congressional Review Act because bureaucrats know
that Congress simply does not have the time or the resources to
consider hundreds of rules, draft a bill for each one, and get each one
signed into law by the time that rule would take effect. The result is
our constituents bear the burden of this new bureaucratic cost without
any accountability to eliminate it. H.R. 115 makes a small change to
existing law to allow Congress to catch up to this expected onslaught
of new regulations as the Biden-Harris administration leaves office.
The bill will streamline the process Congress already employs with
respect to executive rulemaking. It does not change the lookback
timeframe, congressional prerogatives to block similar rules, nor does
it eliminate or constrain the executive rulemaking authority in any
way. These things are already in existing law.
All it does is simply allow what Congress can already do in one bill
instead of hundreds. Doing so will allow Congress to keep up with the
rapid pace of midnight rules, reining in the Federal bureaucracy at a
time when historically it is its most aggressive.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the rule and the
underlying bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, before I begin, I will take a moment to
recognize my colleague, Chairman Michael Burgess.
First, I will let him know that he and his family will remain in our
prayers during the difficult time that he is now dealing with, and we
all will keep your daughter in our prayers, as well.
As he also mentioned in his opening remarks, this is the last time
that he will be managing a rule on the House floor before his
retirement. While it is no secret that Congressman Burgess and I have
rarely agreed on issues before us--we probably can't even agree on what
to have for lunch--I have always respected his dedication. I have
always respected his diligence and his service to this institution, and
I know how much he loves this country.
I know I speak for all of us when I say that we appreciate his years
of hard work and we wish him all the very, very best. We look forward
to working with him in other capacities. He has placed his official
portrait right in front of me in the Rules Committee, so I will
constantly think of him.
In any event, Mr. Speaker, now for the matter at hand while we are
all on the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, I wish I could stand here today under different
circumstances and I wish I didn't have to open my remarks with the news
of another senseless tragedy, but here we are again. Yet another school
shooting, this time at Abundant Life Christian School in Madison,
Wisconsin. Innocent people killed; innocent people injured just days
before Christmas.
Let's think about that for a moment.
Innocent people killed and injured while the Republican leadership in
this Congress does absolutely nothing about the epidemic of gun
violence in this country. Nothing at all. It is shameful.
How many times are we going to let this happen? How many more
shootings before we decide enough is enough? This House should be
moving heaven and earth to pass legislation to save lives. Instead,
Republicans are wasting more time on yet another bill that does nothing
and will go absolutely nowhere.
{time} 1230
This so-called Midnight Rules Relief Act that we are considering is
not about helping the American people. It is not about protecting kids
from gun violence. It is not about making our communities safer. This
bill is about one thing only: giving handouts to corporate special
interests.
Republicans are gutting critical protections that keep our air clean,
water safe, and economy fair because they want to give corporate
special interests free rein to pollute, cheat, and exploit the system.
This is about helping billionaires and big donors at the expense of
everyone else.
While we waste time on this nonsense, kids continue to die in
classrooms and parents continue to live in fear every time they drop
their children off at school.
We should be voting on the assault weapons ban. We should be voting
on universal background checks. We should be closing dangerous
loopholes that allow deadly weapons to fall into the wrong hands.
Republicans don't want to do any of that. Why? Follow the money.
Follow the money. Look at who the NRA donates to.
That is how Washington works. It is all one big giveaway for the
special interests and those at the top who want to profit off gun
sales.
I find it shameful. It is horrific that Republicans refuse to break
free from the grip of the gun lobby.
Instead, we are here debating a bill that helps billionaire
corporations and hurts everyday Americans. That is what we are doing in
this Chamber today. What a disgrace, Mr. Speaker.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New Mexico (Ms. Leger Fernandez), a distinguished member of the Rules
Committee.
Ms. LEGER FERNANDEZ. Mr. Speaker, Americans want safety in the
products they buy and the food they eat. Republicans, with this bill,
will undermine the regulations that provide Americans peace of mind.
The government's job is to keep us safe, to put people's health and
safety over corporate profits, but Republicans want to side with
profit-making corporations and their billionaire buddies over the
people's interests.
H.R. 115 would allow congressional Republicans to reverse dozens of
agency rules at once, in one fell swoop, without careful consideration
by professionals or regard for the safety of American families. This
bill would help corporations cut corners at the expense of families
across the country.
[[Page H7249]]
We have seen what happens when rules and regulations aren't in place.
Think back to when cars became deadly fire traps after car accidents
because there were no safety regulations. Remember the defective
airbags that exploded, taking lives instead of saving them?
Without regulations, those car companies would have been able to go
on doing that. Regulations make sure that salmonella does not enter our
food supply and sicken millions.
Because they don't like regulations, because their corporate friends
don't like regulations, in one simple bill, Republicans would eliminate
dozens of agency rules, including a rule to replace lead pipes so
communities have safe drinking water.
There are almost 10 million American households and--listen to this
number--400,000 school and childcare centers that are served by lead
service lines, pipes, or other fixtures. In some of our Republican
districts, there are tens of thousands of families and children exposed
to lead pipes.
Why are they putting their corporate interests over the health and
safety of those who are drinking water from lead pipes?
The Biden administration's October 2024 rule makes sure that those
dangerous lead pipes would be replaced, but if Republicans get their
way, this rule could be on the chopping block without any discussion in
Congress.
This Republican bill could also eliminate a proposed rule to expand
access to contraception. Women deserve to know that Republicans can't
seem to stop going after our reproductive healthcare, this time by
reducing our access to basic contraception. Really, Republicans just
can't seem to respect women's rights to basic healthcare.
The Republican bill could also eliminate a rule to establish safety
standards for infant support cushions and even a rule to finally
implement the National Suicide Hotline Act. Once again, because
Republicans know that these regulations are popular with the American
public, they want to eliminate them without discussion or debate.
``Midnight'' is probably a good name to give to this bill because it
is an in-the-dark attack on our ability to protect Americans now and in
the future.
Congress already has a bill. If they want to reverse a regulation,
they can do it. They can come on the floor and let the American people
know why they want to do it so the American people are not in the dark.
This bill would let Republicans deny women's contraception. It would
let them hide their work to weaken children's safety and hide the fact
that they are turning their back on the suicide hotline.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule and
against this bill.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
These are interesting talking points that have come up against a bill
that the minority purportedly says didn't do anything in the first
place. Let's look at what the facts of the case are.
This bill does nothing to change how the Congressional Review Act
works. It does not change the look-back period for disapproving rules.
It remains 60 legislative days from the point at which a rule is put in
the Federal Register. That is current law.
It does not change whether Congress can block substantially similar
rules. Congress is already able to do that. It is authorized under law
and unchanged by this bill.
It does not proactively constrain or eliminate executive rulemaking
authority.
All this bill does is allow Congress to do what it already can do in
a single bill rather than having to file multiple bills.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, since this is possibly the last time the Rules Committee
will be on the House floor for this Congress, I wanted to take a moment
to review some things--the dysfunction, the chaos, the incompetence,
the extremism, and the broken promises that have become the new norm
under this failed Republican majority.
Republicans came into power talking about openness, transparency, and
regular order. Regular order, my foot. All they have done is delivered
a master class in dysfunction, extremism, and behind-closed-doors
lawmaking.
They promised openness and debate, and they basically broke that
promise the moment they took power. They presided over the most closed,
the most undemocratic, and the most restrictive House of
Representatives certainly since I have been here and probably ever.
Republicans shattered their own record for closed rules, 115 closed
rules in total. Fifty-seven percent of the rules advanced by this
committee were closed. That is a 29 percent increase over the last
Congress, which they had the gall to criticize at the time.
Understand that a closed rule means no amendments--no amendments, no
debate, no nothing. A bill goes to the floor, and we take it or leave
it.
Closed rules may be appropriate at some times, but the unprecedented
number of closed rules here isn't just a failure of process. It is a
deliberate choice by Republican leaders to silence the voices of
Members on both sides of the aisle.
All told, this majority rejected nearly 6,000 amendments in Congress.
Eighty-two percent of them were Democratic amendments blocked by
Republicans. It didn't stop there. Sixty-seven percent of bipartisan
amendments, proposals that could have brought this House together and
delivered results for the American people, were blocked by the
Republicans. They actively rejected bipartisanship.
Here is the most shocking number: Republicans blocked 57 percent of
their own amendments. They didn't just box out Democrats. They boxed
out a lot of their own people who wanted to bring amendments to the
floor and have debates and votes. They blocked more than half of their
own amendments. If I were a Republican, I would be asking: What the
hell is going on around here? Why is this majority so afraid of debate?
We haven't even touched on their incompetence and dysfunction yet.
Multiple times this Congress, we heard from Republican witnesses on
bills that they never brought to the floor. Multiple times they would
pass something through the Rules Committee only to never bring it up
for a vote on final passage.
They still have not sent 13 bills they passed over to the Senate. Do
these guys need to watch ``Schoolhouse Rock!''? I mean, a bill can't
become law if you don't send it over to the Senate.
They are half-passing their crappy bills. You literally can't make
this stuff up, Mr. Speaker. They have waived regular order dozens and
dozens of times, skipping hearings and markups and sidelining
committees of jurisdiction that have extensive expertise on policy
matters.
Let's not forget how we started this Congress--with 5 days and 15
ballots just to elect a Speaker, a Speaker who handed over his gavel to
the most extreme elements of the Republican Party. Then, 9 months
later, the MAGA extremists fired him anyway. They fired him anyway, and
they plunged the House into 3 weeks of complete paralysis and total
chaos; 3 weeks where Congress couldn't move, couldn't legislate,
couldn't do anything all because of Republican incompetence; 3 weeks
where Republicans sat around and argued with themselves and did nothing
at all about the urgent crises facing this country.
That is beyond dysfunction, Mr. Speaker. It is more than a waste of
time. It is pathetic. If this were the private sector, they would all
be fired. Republicans sat around and did nothing for weeks on end while
Democrats pleaded with them to do something, anything, and they did
nothing.
Then, somehow, things got worse because Speaker Johnson didn't end
the dysfunction. He doubled down. Under his leadership, Republicans
issued 56 closed rules in his first 9 months.
Things went from bad to worse. Rule votes failed time and again, a
stunning humiliation for this Republican leadership. For context, Mr.
Speaker, before this Congress, the last time a rule failed on the House
floor was over 20 years ago, in 2002. Now, it is becoming routine
because Republicans can't even pass their own bills.
They said they would complete all 12 appropriations bills before the
August
[[Page H7250]]
2023 recess--another broken promise. They said this year that they
would finally get their act together--another broken promise because
here they are, the week before Christmas, trying to pass another
stopgap funding bill that nobody has even seen the text for.
Where is it? Where is it? Is it hiding behind a desk somewhere in the
Chamber? Is it under the Christmas tree? With Republicans in charge of
this place, maybe the Grinch stole it.
Maybe we will see the text before we get to vote on it. Who knows
with this majority.
It is just astounding, astounding incompetence and chaos. It is
honestly pathetic. Republicans have run this place like a dictatorship,
Mr. Speaker, and they don't even have anything to show for it.
This has been the most ineffective Congress in American history, the
fewest laws passed in the first year of any Congress since the Great
Depression. Maybe, just maybe, it is because Republicans prioritize
extremism and handouts for corporations and billionaires over solutions
for everyday people.
Even when they did work to address real challenges, like avoiding a
catastrophic debt default, keeping the government open, or delivering
essential foreign aid, it was Democrats who stepped up every time and
got those bills over the finish line. They needed our votes every time.
Mr. Speaker, it is fitting that Republicans end this Congress the way
they began it: Shutting down voices, shutting down ideas, and shutting
off debate.
{time} 1245
The American people deserve better. I think that is why the other
side actually lost seats in this election. Control of this Chamber was
decided by 7,309 votes across three districts out of 148 million votes
cast for House candidates nationwide. That is not a mandate for chaos,
Mr. Speaker, it is an indictment of this majority's failed leadership,
and I shudder to think of how bad things will get next year if
Republicans don't change things up.
Given their razor-thin margin next Congress, the way for them to do
that is pretty obvious to me: They need to stop the extremism. They
need to stop the extremism, and they need to get to work with Democrats
to get stuff done.
That is the path ahead. That is what the American people want, and I
hope my Republican friends will take it so we can work together for the
good of the American people. All of us in this Chamber should be
disappointed in the record of this Congress.
My Republican friends, in particular, should be disappointed with
their failed leadership. That has to change. People have to come first.
We have to solve the problems that are facing average people in this
country, and we have an opportunity to do that. It is to turn away from
the practices of this past Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, can I just point out for the record that the number of
rules produced by this Rules Committee under this Republican majority
is more than the number of rules that were produced in the previous
Congress under a Democrat majority. That is just a fact of life.
Look, I recognize this time of year, it does get tense. The ranking
member knows well that the committee has to remain flexible to be able
to give the Speaker the tools he needs to get done whatever needs to be
done for the government to be funded for the end of year. It is not
always a pretty process. It wasn't when Democrats were in charge, and
certainly this year, the challenge remains.
I do want to say this: The motion to vacate the Speaker a year and
some months ago was a mistake. It was a mistake brought to the floor by
individuals who had a particular axe to grind, and they ground it. It
hurt the country, and it was wrong.
We are so fortunate that Speaker Johnson stepped forward. He took the
challenge that the Conference provided him, and he has provided
excellent stewardship in the 16 months that have followed. We are
enormously grateful as a Nation, especially at this time at the end of
the year where we are giving thanks and we are looking around and
counting our blessings.
Well, one of those blessings that families should count is Speaker
Mike Johnson because he has really placed the future of his country
front and center in his life. His family has had to make sacrifices,
and he has had to make sacrifices.
Yes, we have made some sacrifices on the Rules Committee. I freely
admit that, but this country is worth that. As we wrap this up--and
this may not be the last rule of the year. You never know. The
excitement is always around every corner. As we conclude this debate,
I, for one, just want to say how grateful I am to the Speaker of the
House, Mike Johnson, for the work that he has done in delivering us
and getting us here. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his response, but maybe one of
the reasons why you had the number of rules you did is because you had
to keep on redoing them because they either failed on the House floor
or they couldn't pass the House floor.
When the gentleman says that it was a mistake to vacate the Speaker's
chair, it wasn't a mistake. It was something that the gentleman and the
Republicans deliberately did by changing the rules to make it easier
for any single Member to vacate the chair to get rid of the Speaker.
That was a deliberate change in the rules that Republicans made
possible because they were afraid of the extremists. They sided with
the extremists in their Conference.
Again, I have nothing but personal high regard for the current
Speaker of the House, but I don't think it is appropriate to say that
Republicans are necessarily happy with his leadership.
I am just reading a quote from one of my Republican colleagues here
who said that the Speaker's overseeing of the CR process, the
continuing resolution process, is--and I am saying this directly--a
``dumpster fire.'' A dumpster fire.
All I am pleading with my Republican friends to do is to change your
ways as we enter the new Congress, to actually make this place function
in a way that doesn't always cave in to the extreme, rightwing, MAGA
elements of your Conference and actually put people first.
We all don't have to agree on everything to agree on something, but
the way my Republican friends run this place, even something we agree
on, we can't get to the floor.
Maybe if we open the process up a little bit more, and we don't try
to break this Congress' record for having the most closed rules, maybe
we will have a deliberative process, and we can get some stuff done and
the American people might have some confidence in this institution.
Right now, this place is not functioning. This is the least
productive Congress that I can ever recall, perhaps even in history. I
don't think that that is kind of the title that anybody should want to
aspire to.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, I would just point out that in the last election that
the gentleman keeps referring to, Republicans did prevail. They
prevailed up and down, Presidency, the Senate, and the House. It is a
narrow margin to be sure, but it keeps you on your toes when you are
trying to manage a very slim majority.
I think for the first time in history, there is a larger majority in
the Senate than there will be in the House in the next Congress. The
American people heard a vision articulated by our Presidential
candidate, President Trump, and they responded to it.
I mean, what has failed the last 2 years has been leadership from the
White House. It has been nonexistent. We are entering a time where
there will be a bold vision for America, articulated by soon-to-be 47th
President Donald J. Trump. I, for one, am grateful and looking forward
to his leadership on that.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I respond to the gentleman that I think that when you
look at the numbers, the election was pretty close.
[[Page H7251]]
Yeah, unfortunately, for people who think like me, Donald Trump
became President. I think that is a terrible thing for the country, but
that is what ended up happening.
At the same time, the American people voted to lower their margin
here in the House. Maybe that is because the American people are paying
more attention to what is happening in this Chamber and not liking what
they are seeing, what they are hearing.
I think the message of the last election, given how close everything
is, is the American people want us to work together, because if not, we
are not going to get very much done. I think there are a lot of things
that we need to do.
I began my opening today referring to the terrible tragedy in
Madison, Wisconsin. I think the American people would like us to do
something to prevent gun violence in this country.
I think they want us to do more to lower prices. I think they want us
to do more to increase wages, to make housing more affordable and
accessible for people. I think they want us to take on the
pharmaceutical industry, which we have tried to do under the last two
Democratic Presidents, but my Republican friends seem to always be
critical of those efforts to lower prescription drug prices, but they
want to have healthcare costs lower.
They want us to take on everyday problems. I don't think you can do
that if all you bring to the floor are extremist measures, measures
that, quite frankly, play well with a small group of hard, rightwing
conservatives in this country, but have no appeal to anybody else.
Mr. Speaker, we are here in the aftermath of yet another senseless
gun massacre, another preventable loss of life. Yet, this majority
would rather do the bidding of special interests than address an actual
crisis facing our Nation.
The bill we are talking about here today on regulations, again, is
big corporations' dream come true. It is a way to eliminate regulation
designed to protect the well-being and the safety of the American
people without having a lot of debate and just doing it all at once
with a bunch of repeals all bunched together, and just giving big
corporations what they want. I think that is a terrible idea.
Big corporations don't speak for the people I represent in Worcester.
Big corporations, quite frankly, are working overtime to try to deny my
constituents the fair shake that they all want so that they can make
more profits.
My colleagues on the other side need to take a hard look in the
mirror. They need to ask themselves, again, on the issue of gun
violence, how many more shootings until they find the courage to stand
up to the gun lobby and actually do something.
The American people are watching, and they are tired of this
cowardice. They want us to act. They want us to keep people safe. They
sure as hell don't want us wasting their time on corporate giveaways
like the ones contained in the legislation that we are going to be
debating later today.
Mr. Speaker, enough is enough. I urge my colleagues to reject this
shameful bill and start doing the job we were sent here to do,
protecting the people we serve, helping to even the playing field,
helping to give people more hope that their life will improve in the
future.
I urge a ``no'' vote on this rule, a ``no'' vote on the underlying
bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, the Congressional Review Act, a lot of times, people
don't think about it. It is not something that registers or strikes a
lot of cords in people's souls, but let me just tell you something, we
all have those moments in our lives: I remember where I was when the
man landed on the Moon. I remember where I was when a world leader
died. I remember where I was when the Congressional Review Act was
allowed to go into law under George W. Bush early in his administration
that prevented the institution of what was called the repetitive injury
rule.
I ran a small medical practice at the time, not a big business. I had
50 employees in my office, and I was going to have to change every
computer terminal, every keyboard, and every keyboard rest to be in
compliance with the repetitive injury rule that some agency in the
Federal Government had produced.
Congress, early in the days of the Bush administration, passed the
Congressional Review Act, which reversed this rule. I remember pulling
into my driveway one evening, probably early the year 2001. We didn't
have cable news and 24-hour news back then. I was listening to NPR on
the radio.
The news came across the wire that Congress had repealed this Federal
rule that was going to cost me tens of thousands of dollars in my small
medical practice. Although that was a small step for man, a giant leap
for mankind, it was at that moment I realized in my mind the importance
of my Representative looking at the rules that are produced by a
Federal agency. I didn't need more paperwork to make my life safe at
that point.
Clearly, I urge this body to support the rule and the underlying
legislation. The bill allows Congress to more efficiently review rules
issued during the midnight hours of the President's term by reviewing
more than one rule at a time. This change would let Congress properly
oversee agency rulemaking in the period when a disproportionate amount
of rulemaking historically occurs.
Mr. Speaker, for perhaps the last time, I yield back the balance of
my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this question will be postponed.
____________________