Like other carve-out amendments just offered, this amendment would strike from the bill the Separation of Powers Restoration Act and the essential judicial review protections of the Regulatory Accountability Act. It should be rejected. We should not be settling for weak judicial review that produces rubber stamps of agency action. We should be voting for the strong judicial review reform in the bill that prevents judicial rubber stamps. Beyond that, the bill would exclude from title I's rulemaking reforms children's toys and product safety rules. But again, the bill does nothing to prevent good rules in these areas. It will produce better rules, rules that are smarter and less costly, freeing resources for job creation and higher wages. Smarter rules are precisely what we need to protect children's health and safety, and more jobs and higher wages are what are needed to help families provide for their children. I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Tom Marino: “Like other carve-out amendments just offered, this amendment would strike from the bill the Separation of Powers…”
On the recordJanuary 11, 2017
Share
More from Tom Marino
Sep 28, 2018
I have an amendment at the desk. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Strike all that follows after the enacting clause and insert the following: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be…
Jun 15, 2018
May I ask how much time does the gentleman from Virginia have left? The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Jun 15, 2018
How much time is remaining on my side? The CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 16 minutes remaining.
Jun 15, 2018
I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to the amendment. The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania is recognized for 5 minutes. There was no objection.





