On the recordMarch 7, 2018
I appreciate the opportunity to speak. Mr. Speaker, I am actually a little bit confused. I thought this was supposed to be a debate on a rule dealing with overturning onerous EPA regulations. Instead, our colleagues on the left want to talk about something totally nongermane and change the subject. And then we wonder why the American people get so frustrated that this institution can't seem to address its big issues. {time} 1300 I also heard a little bit ago an impassioned claim by my colleague on the left over here that the legislation that we are talking about today somehow flies in the face of the courts. That is not true because the courts have already overturned this regulation one time and set it aside, and it has cost the industries millions and millions of dollars that they shouldn't have had to spend. I also heard it claimed that it flies in the face of commonsense, science-based evidence. That is not true because, if it were, then the courts wouldn't have made the decision to set it aside in the first place. H.R. 1917, the BRICK Act, is about regulatory common sense, Mr. Speaker, but it is also about preserving good-paying jobs in rural communities across America. Brickmakers and tile manufacturers are primarily small businesses, and their product is critical for our infrastructure.…





