Thomas Massie: “We now have had a sneak preview of what the next hour of debate is going to look like. The other side is going to argue…”

“We now have had a sneak preview of what the next hour of debate is going to look like. The other side is going to argue that we need to give up more power to the executive branch. I think our constituents would be appalled. They sent us here and they say we are not effective enough, yet the other side of the aisle is going to say, oh, we need to give the power to the executive branch. We have also heard here already tonight that this bill, which would restore our Constitution, they say may be unconstitutional. They are referring to a Supreme Court case that has nothing to do with this bill, INS v. Chadha, which said you can't have a legislative veto. That bill that they were ruling on ran afoul of the Constitution because it didn't require passage in both Chambers and a signature by the President. The REINS Act requires passage in both Chambers and a signature by the President, so their claim that it is unconstitutional is absurd because this is what is required to restore the Constitution. Their claim that the REINS Act is redundant because we already have the Congressional Review Act is equally as absurd. There have been over 90,000 rules passed by the executive branch since the Congressional Review Act was passed. Only 20 of those have been able to be repealed by this Chamber and the Senate. This is not a substitute for the Congressional Review Act. It is not redundant. This is what is required.…”