Lamar Smith: “Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I would like to point out that the National Federation of Independent Business…”

“Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I would like to point out that the National Federation of Independent Business actually does support this legislation. I also would like for the record to show that a recent Gallup poll taken on October 24 of this year said that small business owners themselves cite ``complying with government regulations'' as their most important problem. Now, that's why we are here today. Mr. Chairman, I oppose this amendment because it puts the cart before the horse. The reason we require agencies to conduct regulatory flexibility analysis is so the agencies and the public will know how a new regulation will affect small businesses before the agency issues the regulation. The amendment would exempt from the Regulatory Flexibility Act any rule that would result in net job creation. We certainly know that regulations can destroy jobs. Even the administration acknowledges that. Whether regulations can ever truly create jobs is another question all together. Assuming that a regulation could create jobs, an agency will not know this without analysis first, which is what the bill requires agencies to do. There is no good reason to transfer this responsibility to conduct this analysis from the agency, themselves, to the Office of Management and Budget, as the amendment proposes. For these reasons, I oppose the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.…”