On the recordJanuary 7, 2016
I share the gentleman's concerns about the impact of regulations on jobs, but I submit that the right way to address that concern is to join me in supporting the bill. The bill includes transparency requirements sure to increase public pressure on agencies to make sure that contemplated new regulations do not have unnecessary, adverse impacts on job creation. To exempt regulations from that pressure would make our regulatory system less protective of jobs, not more. Indeed, the gentleman's amendment would give the executive branch a powerful incentive to manipulate its jobs impact and cost-benefit analyses to give false impressions that avoid the requirements of the bill. {time} 1430 The amendment also puts the cart before the horse. It offers carve- outs from the bill based on factors that cannot be determined adequately before important analytical requirements in existing statutes and executive orders governing the rulemaking process are applied in the first place. Specific provisions in the bill--for example, judicial review provisions in title I for proposed consent decrees and settlement agreements--are designed to protect the proper application of those analytical requirements. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
