David Schweikert: “Let's try something that is, actually, fairly novel around here because, in this particular case, this is just a few…”

“Let's try something that is, actually, fairly novel around here because, in this particular case, this is just a few words. Let's actually read it: ``Whether or not the rule or set of rules limits or prevents an agency from applying new or emerging technologies to improve efficiency and effectiveness of government.'' Oh, come on. How do you oppose that? I understand you may not like the bill, itself, but as an amendment, if we are really trying to push our government into this century of utilization of information and technology, you would at least like this amendment. Look, this is simple. This is actually something we should be weaving in and out of what we do here in order to try to drive the use of technology and information to make us more efficient and more respectful of our taxpayers. As to the quality of information, how do you even know that the way a regulation is being done is actually being done in the most efficient, technologically sound, and rational way? I believe the simple language here helps drive the commission to actually reflect that. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert). The amendment was agreed to. Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Walberg The CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 printed in part B of House Report 114-388.”