I will support the Moran amendment because I think it is an improvement over the text that has been submitted to this Committee of the Whole. But I do not think it goes far enough. I would hope that when we go into conference with the other body, the managers of this legislation will look with great care at the other body's stand on this very issue. In the other body, in their unfunded mandates legislation, there is an explicit provision saying that there should not be judicial review. I think that is appropriate, for the very simply reason that judicial review can tie up regulations for a very, very long time and leave a great deal of uncertainly about what the regulations will in fact be in the long term. Section 202 of H.R. 5 provides that before promulgating a final regulation containing a Federal mandate, the agency would have to prepare a detailed statement analyzing a number of different factors, economic and other impacts of the regulation.
On the recordJanuary 31, 1995
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing judicial review and its implications during a committee meeting.
Share
More from Henry Waxman
Nov 20, 2014
As the designee of my colleague from California (Mr. McNerney), I have an amendment at the desk. The CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment. The text of the amendment is as follows: In section 3(b), strike ``If the Administrator…
Nov 19, 2014
So what we are seeing is something that sounds good from a party that has no credibility to say that they are for more science information. What they would do is limit what EPA would be able to use to determine, based on the science, what…
Dec 2, 2014
We know that at least five people are dead and dozens have been injured by these defective airbags.





