Hank Johnson: “This amendment would add an additional level of analysis in the regulatory process that examines whether or not…”

“This amendment would add an additional level of analysis in the regulatory process that examines whether or not regulations have a negative impact on jobs and wages. Adding this additional requirement that is highly speculative and analytical would further slow down the rulemaking process, adding more red tape. I invite the gentleman to support my amendment, amendment No. 9, which we will get to shortly, that would exclude from the bill any rule, consent decree, or settlement agreement that would result in net job creation or have greater benefits than costs. I would also hope that my friends on both sides of the aisle would have a desire to improve the economy and take actions to foster job growth, instead of adding more red tape to the regulatory process. To the extent that regulations have anything to do with jobs, H.R. 2804's proponents should overwhelmingly support my amendment No. 9, which exempts from the bill all rules that OMB determines would result in net job creation. With respect to regulations stifling job creation, the evidence, Madam Chairman, is to the contrary. If anything, regulations can promote job growth and put Americans back to work. For instance, the BlueGreen Alliance notes: Studies on the direct impact of regulations on job growth have found that most regulations result in modest job growth or have no effect, and economic growth has consistently surged forward in concert with these health and safety protections.…”