Mr. President, I have come to the floor many times, as we all do, to discuss issues that are important to our States, in my case the State of Nebraska, on issues that are important for our Nation.…
Mr. President, I have come to the floor many times, as we all do, to discuss issues that are important to our States, in my case the State of Nebraska, on issues that are important for our Nation. Many times those comments deal with what seems to be the constant regulatory assault on our Nation's job creators.
In meetings across Nebraska--and I did 15 townhall meetings in August--the second and third questions I often got, if not the very first, concerned the regulatory burden our Federal agencies are placing on our job creators.
This administration has generated nothing short of a mountain of redtape, including hundreds of new regulations. Of these, at least 219 have been categorized as significant. What that means is they will cost more than $100 million per year, $100 million taken out of our economy to finance regulation. The administration doesn't even dispute the mountain of redtape, nor does it dispute the size of the mountain that is created.
In a letter from the President to Speaker Boehner, the White House identified seven regulations on its agenda, each costing not $100 million but at least $1 billion per year. These costs take important capital out of our economy. These costs weigh on our job creators. These costs punish the little guy, and there is no doubt about it.
This mountain is so massive, the administration has had to expand the Federal workforce itself to write the regulations and to enforce them. Employment at Federal agencies is up 13 percent since President Obama took office.
With unemployment in excess of 9 percent, and underemployment greater than that, this administration is expanding the size of government to fuel more job-suppressing restrictions, and it makes no sense. It makes no sense to me as an individual Senator, but it makes no sense to the people of Nebraska.
For this reason, I am introducing legislation with the senior Senator from Arizona to press the pause button on this massive wave of redtape before it engulfs our very economy.
Our legislation is very straightforward. It says: Our small businesses are getting crushed; our citizens can't find jobs. Freeze the regulatory onslaught through 2013.
But our work simply cannot stop there. We also need some targeted regulatory reforms to rein in government bureaucracies that are simply out of control. Thus, I will also be introducing two other pieces of additional legislation today to help temper the endless quest for additional power, jurisdiction and, therefore, regulation.
The first one would close a loophole that allows agencies to grab power
without opportunity for Congressional review.
Under the current state of the law, the Congressional Review Act permits Congress to use special procedures to step in and to disapprove of agency rules. However, in this administration, agencies have recently chosen to use what they call ``guidance documents'' instead of rules to achieve their policy preferences and to expand their power.
I am troubled by this trend because their efforts appear to deliberately and intentionally circumvent American law specifically crafted to protect citizens from aggressive bureaucracies. We have an example, but there are many. I wish to use this one.
I am talking about a guidance document issued jointly by EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers on May 2 of this year. It is very recent. The guidance documents's goal is clear--to expand Federal power over waterways.
But don't take my word for it. According to the EPA's own analysis, the guidance would significantly expand the waters of the United States subject to Federal control and regulation.
The Midwestern Farm Bureau has said the guidance ``defines jurisdiction in the broadest way possible.''
This is a page straight out of this administration's playbook. If their policy goal is rejected by Congress, they use their regulatory power to accomplish their agenda any way they can. Stretch the law, ignore the law, claim that the statute is too ambiguous, circumvent it, put out a guidance document to interpret it. That is exactly what they are doing. We have seen this playbook used over and over by this administration and its Federal agencies.
They should have gotten the message after an unsuccessful attempt during the last Congress to vastly expand their jurisdiction over virtually all waters, from irrigation ditches to farm ponds. But like a child that hears ``no'' from his parents, they jumped ahead, the administration went ahead anyway through this guidance document.
As the North Dakota Farm Bureau president described it, the EPA's guidance is an end run around Congress, and I am quoting:
If you can't get what you want with Congress' blessing,
make an end-run around them. That seems to be what is
happening here. And make no mistake. If this guidance is
adopted, EPA could regulate any or all waters found within a
State, no matter how small or seemingly unconnected to a
Federal interest.
The agencies could not convince Congress to change the law. So now what is happening? The same goal is being pursued in a different way that bypasses us. Notably, both the House and the Senate have expressed strong concern about this guidance document. Twenty Senators sent a letter noting that it represents a dramatic expansion of Federal power over private land.
In another letter, 41 Senators asserted that making changes to the scope of the agency's activities through guidance instead of through rulemaking is ``fundamentally unfair.'' This letter requested the agencies ``abandon any further action on this guidance document.'' This is a very significant concern. This guidance document also has shown us that there is a huge loophole through which agencies can circumvent the rulemaking process in its entirety, as well as circumventing congressional intent in order to expand Federal power.
The legislation I introduced today closes the loophole. It amends the Congressional Review Act to cover both traditional rules and guidance documents--no more end run around Congress. Consequently, agencies would be on notice that the loophole through which they intend to circumvent our will and the will of the American public is now a closed door. In other words, citizens would have another layer of protection from agencies seeking to unfairly expand Federal jurisdiction.
Finally, today I am introducing the Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act. Farmers and ranchers across this Nation are concerned about the EPA's efforts to regulate dust. Despite what the administrator is saying in farm country, EPA is still in the midst of their review of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter or, put simply, ``farm dust.'' In rural America, farm dust is a fact of life. I grew up on a farm. It is dusty there. We kick it up while driving on unpaved roads or working in farm fields. Farm dust has long been considered to have no health concern at ambient levels. However, EPA is considering bringing down the hammer by ratcheting down that standard to a level that would be economically devastating for many in our rural areas. That defies common sense.
To restore common sense to these burdensome job-threatening regulations and to give certainty to rural America, I am introducing this legislation. The bill simply says no to EPA regulating dust in rural America. Yet it maintains the protections of the Clean Air Act to public health. It provides immediate certainty to farmers in rural areas by preventing revision of the current dust standard for a year. Afterward, EPA could regulate farm dust but only if they followed a scientific standard. First, they would need to show scientific evidence of substantial adverse health effects caused by dust. Thus far, the strongest the EPA can conjure up in terms of science is to say it is ``uncertain.'' Second, EPA would need to show that the benefit of additional regulation outweighs economic costs. These are commonsense standards. Yet the EPA has unfortunately been unable to see the light, making this legislation necessary.
These are three commonsense regulatory reforms that are sorely needed: a 2-year moratorium on job-constraining regulations; No. 2, making agency guidance documents subject to a simple up-or-down vote by Congress; and stopping the ill-advised farm dust regulation. They would provide much certainty and relief for our Nation's job creators and our American workers.
I urge my colleagues to cosponsor these important efforts. I urge the White House to support us. The runaway train of regulation is weighing down on America's ingenuity and job creation. It is time to unshackle American workers with these commonsense reforms.
I yield the floor.
