On the recordJuly 14, 1995
I rise to both compliment the Senator from Texas on what she is attempting to do, if it is what I think she is attempting to do, and I would like to be able to ask her a few questions and ask her to consider whether or not she might be willing to make a few modifications. Let me begin by saying that the idea of an individual or a corporation expending their time, energy, and money in an effort to take an action in which they operate in total good faith, and they go to a Federal agency, speak to an appropriately authorized bureaucrat, someone with authority to make a judgment, and are told that, yes, what you are proposing, based on what information you have given us, is totally appropriate, is consistent with the rules and regulations, and you should be able to go forward; and then that person goes forward and finds--after they have made their investment, after they have undertaken their action, they are told, wrong, wrong, you are violating the regulation, you are violating the rule, you are subject to a civil or criminal penalty here. And the taxpayer retorts and says, but they told me it was all right. They said it was OK to do this. I think that taxpayer should, as this amendment suggests, be exempt from civil and criminal penalties, with no civil administrative penalty, either court imposed or administratively imposed, if they violate a rule after having been told by the rulemaker that it is OK to go ahead and do this.
Source
govinfo.gov




