Malcolm Wallop: “at the end of my remarks I know what happens. This will be used as a means by which to destroy what we are trying to do…”

“at the end of my remarks I know what happens. This will be used as a means by which to destroy what we are trying to do for small business. The letter from the Secretary of the Treasury is precisely why we need this amendment. I will move to strike the provision. If I could have the attention of the Senator from Ohio, I would like to say why it was included and why it is needed and why I will fight to return one day to put it in. The fact of it is that the IRS is the principal agency to whom this ought to apply. The Office of Advocacy in the Small Business Administration says so. But they have one person--one person, Madam President--to look at everything that comes out of the IRS. Now if we want to expand exponentially the staff of the Small Business Advocacy Administration, we can do that, but the IRS will ignore them anyway because they have no means by which to enforce the RFA. The Regulatory Flexibility Act now applies only when Federal agencies are required to issue notice and comment. As a result, interpretative rulings, general statement of policy, rules concerning loans, grants, benefits or public contracts are not subject to the analytical requirements under the act. Because the IRS claims that its rulings are 'interpretive'--to advise the public on the construction of the law-- the IRS falls outside of the requirements of RFA. Our amendment would subject the IRS to the rules of RFA. It would treat them like other agencies.”