Floor Statements

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act. Although the intent of this legislation is to, no doubt, provide additional safeguards, it does, in fact, add an additional level of bureaucracy.

It appears to be a good bill. As a former mayor, I fought to ensure that my city and other cities were not unduly impacted by unfunded Federal mandates. In Michigan, we worked cooperatively with our Federal counterparts on proposed regulations that would generate obligations on local governments. In fact, as a local government official, I supported the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act, as it was a result of multiple years of effort by our State and local government officials to control the burden of many unfunded Federal mandates.

Along with the consequences I have previously mentioned, this bill will also grant corporations special access to information about a rule and an opportunity to submit feedback to an agency before a rule is even proposed. Additionally, the legislation would shut the American people out of this early review. The bill would also require agencies to perform retrospective analysis at the request of any chairman or ranking minority member of any standing or select committee of the House or the Senate. The bill neither improves nor streamlines the regulatory process. It expands agency roles and interjects politics into the process.

The Office of Management and Budget is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act. This bill also expands OMB's role, and it requires them to guarantee that each agency complies with the act's requirements. Independent regulatory agencies will then have to send their rulemaking analyses to OMB.

The existing Unfunded Mandates Reform Act expressly prohibits courts from using the law to stay, enjoin, invalidate, or otherwise affect an agency rule. H.R. 50 would fundamentally change the law by eliminating this prohibition, allowing regulated industries to abuse this expanded judicial review and tie up rules in litigation for years.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this act, and I request that this body work within the existing safeguards in place.

Mr. Speaker, on February 2, 2015, due to weather, I was unavoidably detained and missed recorded votes 51-53. Had I been present, I would have voted: On Roll Call 51--Yes on H.R. 361--Medical Preparedness Allowable Use Act; On Roll Call 52--Yes on H.R. 615-- Department of Homeland Security Interoperable Communications Act; On Roll Call 53--Yes on H.R. 623--Social Media Working Group Act of 2015.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert my statement in the Record, as a woman and as a Member of Congress and a citizen of the United States, that the House should vote for bigger paychecks, and they should vote for better infrastructure instead of attacking women's access to health care.

Mr. Speaker, I stand before you today to recognize a Federal agency that I am proud to say that I was a part of for many years: the United States Postal Service. I recall the pride and the sense of responsibility in delivering the U.S. mail.

I am honored to share the most recent achievement of the postal service with you. Sunday deliveries and other adjustments to mail processing were instrumental in allowing the United States Postal Service to set holiday season records, with 524 million packages delivered in December. That is up 18 percent from 2013.

The United States Postal Service has reported it delivered more than 28 million packages on December 22, the busiest day and the largest single day for package delivery in its history. The package delivery record on December 22 was set while the United States Postal Service also delivered about 463 million pieces of mail.

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this moment to recognize and applaud the hardworking individuals who made this possible and to also say another 118,000 packages were delivered on Christmas Day.

``No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.''

Section 10:

``No State shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make any thing but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.''