On the recordFebruary 4, 2015
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to highlight, again, that when there was a report done by the GAO, they found that 90 percent of retrospective regulation reviews led agencies to revise, clarify, or eliminate regulatory text. All this does is ask for a report. It doesn't repeal it. It is not going to slow it down. What it does is ask for a report. That is an important process to go through, and when we have gone through it in the past, 90 percent of the time, according to the GAO, it has led to revisions that are important. It is very difficult to understand what is going to happen on the front end. All we are asking for in this bill is let's consult with the individuals, the property owners, others who are affected, and then, if we need a report, and we are going to limit that to chairmen and ranking members, that is an appropriate thing to do. What are we afraid of? We are just trying to get transparency to the issue and be able to highlight this. I worry, when you talk about the numbers of reviews and how far behind, it just shows the massive numbers of regulations that go through this process. We should be able to review those. There are real Americans that are affected by this every day. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings).…





