On the recordOctober 25, 2017
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 469, an unwarranted and costly intrusion into Congress' powers under Article I of the Constitution that will undermine the enforcement of statutory deadlines. When passing laws, Congress routinely establishes mandatory deadlines for agency action. These statutory deadlines serve several purposes. They establish congressional priorities, attempt to reduce undue delay in an agency's compliance with the law, and communicate the importance of a legal requirement to the public. But because agency resources are limited, there is widespread noncompliance with statutory deadlines, as the Administrative Conference of the United States has long observed. Accordingly, a plaintiff with standing may file a lawsuit to complete a schedule for an agency to complete an action required by Congress, often referred to as a ``deadline suit.'' As the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, the GAO, reported earlier this year, ``Most deadline suits are resolved through a negotiated settlement agreement because, in the majority of them, it is undisputed that a statutory deadline was missed,'' and there was no legal defense to the lawsuit. But proponents of H.R. 469 assert that these settlements undercut applicable administrative law and short-circuit review of new regulations.…





