Important agency rules from being delayed, but delays odd seem to be the objective here. We also submitted an amendment that would exempt agencies from the requirement of title two. I would ask the amendments offered by Ranking Member cummings and myself along with steven lynch, that would require agencies to consider the benefits of regular laces as well as the cost be made in order. I thank the committee for its attention. Thank you very much. Glad that youre here and your suggestions if for the committee would be his welcome and i thank you very much. Id next like to go to mr. Moreno, the chair on breaking reform commercial and antitrust law. Thank you, chairman. Miss lauder for giving me the opportunity to testify today regarding hr 712. Im going to address that bill first, then if you have no objections, i can go to the next bill so you dont have to listen to me speak for 15 minutes straight. You get a break between that. This is the sunshine for regulation and regulatory decrees and settle 2016. Hr 712 was introduced in its original form by mr. Collins of georgia. The Judiciary Committee ordered hr 712 favorably reported on march 24 of 2015. The rules Committee Print of hr 712, also includes two other pieces of Regulatory Reform legislation, reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee. It includes the quote alert act introduced by mr. Radcliffe of texz in order to be reported on april 15 of 2015. Title 3 includes the quote, providing accountability through tranz parnsy. Introduced by as hr 690 by mr. Liukinmeier of missouri and ordered to be reported on the same day at hr 712. Mr. Chairman, the need for this legislation to help create jobs out of recovery is clear. Despite claim that is the dwraet recession has ended, Small Business owners and mainstream families, america is still struggling to create enough new jobs and Economic Growth to produce the prosperity americans need and deserve. Enablgt acti ining reforms. It is essential to this effort. Federal regulations already impose the nearly 2 trillion. Under that burden, simply cannot create the jobs needed to produce a Better Future for americans. Todays bill contains measures that will help remedy the situation. Title one, sunshine for regulatory decrees and settlement act. Washington each year. Time and again, across regular lacelations. In this fashion, strikes the bill with proregulation plaintiffs. The deal lead to a lawsuit from the plaintiffs. And the ultimate result is a settlement. That carry it is force of law and results in new impressive regulations. These discussions occur in secret. Regulated entities, our nations job creator, often dont know about these deals until Court Documents become public. But then its too late. Number one brings this abusive practice to an end. Title ii, the alert act, rests on the same principle of transparency. Even when new regulations were not forced upon them by judicial decree, americans deserved to know what new regulation agencies plan to send their way. They deserve to know earlier and more clearly what those new rules will look like, how much they will cost and when they may be imposed. Current law requires the executive branch to disclose this information on a semiannual or annual basis. But the Obama Administration has gained and abused this process by regular le delaying disclosures and denying information. The alert agent requires Disclosure Requirements by allowing more details to be disclosed. It also requires the publication of monthly updates of information on the rules, schedules, costs and economic affects including jobs impacts. Finally, title 3 helps to fix one of the most maddening things confronted by main street americans and Small Business owners. Not only do federal regulators issue too many regulations that cost too much, too often, those regulations are impossible for an ordinary citizen to understand. Title 3 offers a welcome remedy by requiring each agency to publish an online, 100 word plain language summary of any new regulation. The provisions in this bill are sure to help americans who are besieged by the daily flood of new regulations flowing from washingtons regulatory bure ok oksy. I thank collins, radcliffe and lukemeier for introducing each piece. I request that the rules committee grant a rule that allows for expeditious consideration of hr 427. Thank you and i yield back. Gl thank you very much. Very suh sinlgt and i appreciate it very much. You taking your time to wait the number of hours that you had this afternoon. Mr. Johnson. Thank you, mr. Chairman and its great to be back with you. Happy new year to earn. I rise or i speak in opposition to hr 712, the sunshine for regulatory decrees and settlement act of 2015, but rather than bringing sunshine into the rule making process, what this does is throw dark sidexudmy of the moon shade on process. In fact, the sunshine for regulatory decrees and settlements act turns the lights out on regulations in place to protect the health, safety and well being of the people. This misnomered legislation should be renamed the lights out act of 2015. Title 1 of hr 712 imposes numerous burdensome procedural rirm requirements on agencies designed to hamstring and discourage the use of Consent Decrees and settlements that ensure the enforcement of the law. Proponents of this provision argue that it is necessary because federal agencies collude with proregulatory plaintiffs to advance a mutually agreed upon regulatory agenda through the use of Consent Decrees and settlement agreement, but according to my and our ill say according to my republican colleagues, this sue and settle litigation, specifically allows agencies to skirt the requirement of the administrative procedure act to dictate the contents of an agency rule making or buying the Agency Action. Simply put, the majority has not put forth a shred of credible evidence to sport this claim. To the contrary, agreements are an important tool to ensuring the timely compliance with stat choir deadlines, established by congress to protect the environment and the Publics Health and safety. In fact, the Government Accountability office, gao, reported in december 2014, that there is zero evidence indicating that agencies collude with Public Interest groups in bringing these Consent Decrees as the majority has often claim. In its report, the gao referred to these lawsuits as deadline suits because they simply compel agencies to take stat torly required actions within a designated time frame. The gao found little evidence that deadline suits determined the substantive outcome of Agency Action because Agency Officials quote stated they have not and would not agree to settlements in a deadline suit that finalized the substantive outcome of the rule making or declare the substance of the final rule, end quote. Earlier this year, a regulatory policy advocate for public citizen, also clarified during the legislative hearing on hr 712, that quote, all of the settlements scrutinized by gao pursuant to the epas Rule Making Authority under the clean air act, went through the Public Notice and comment process allowing all members of the public an opportunity to comment on the rule before it is finalized. End quote. This finding confirms that there is little evidence supporting the proposition that federal agencies engage in back room deals with proregulatory groups to circumvent the apa or substantively bind the agency in a subsequent rule making. In the evidence of collusion between federal agencies and plaintiffs, hr 712 addresses a nonexistent problem through a series of requirements to design ed to undermine the rule of law by preventing the enforcement of statutes passed by congress to protect the public to slow down Agency Action and a bust the door wide open to almost anyone who wants to impede Agency Action by intervening in these actions, for example, hr 712 would allow for nearly any private party to intervene in a Consent Decree revealing the legislations true purpose of stacking the deck in industrys favor to avoid the enforcement of the law. This intervention right is dropped so broadly that if the regulatory action at issue involved the clean water act, any person who uses water would have the right to intervene in the fwoenegotiations on a poten decree or settlement agreement. Certainly, any industry interest would not hesitate to intervene. Title ii of hr 712 imposes a sixmonth moratorium on all rules ranging from the mundane but necessary rules such as numerous u. S. Coast guard bridges, closing regulations. To rules that ensure our health and safety. The only reason for this unprecedented delay, the socalled diminishing transparency of the regulatory process. Some of my republican colleagues have argued that regulatory transparency, which is important to Public Participation in the rule making process, requires timely notice of proposed rules and yet, not withstanding thg claim by republicans, millions of americans have recently commented on a single proposed rule making. Representing the largest public response to any request for Public Comment in a federal rule making in the history of this nation. This extensive activity in the past year alone hardly suggests an Agency Process shrouded in secrecy and in need of reform. In addition, this would saddle every federal agency that are independent because they arent subject to the centralized review of rule making by the white house through the office of information and Regulatory Affairs. With a number of analytical reports requirements that duplicate existing requirements bit into the rule making process. This requirement would drown these agencies and waste taxpayer dollars every month. These requirements would apply to every rule within the administrative procedure act. About 6,000 per year. Many of which simply involve bridge openings and closings by coast guard. In addition to wasting Agency Resources and by extension taxpayer dollars, this bill would have the unintended consequence of increasing transparency. This would inundate the public with monthly waves of data that would be largely useless and undermine the publics ability to identify regulations that actually matter in public debate. Further more, this arbitrary regulatory delay would also have the effect of undermining transparency in the regulatory process by specifically prohibiting the office of information and Regulatory Affairs from taking into account the benefits of rules when providing total cost estimates for proposed and final rules. Thus, a regulation that costs only 1 p, but results in 1 billion this benefits would only be reported as costing 1. Would require a notice of proposed rule making that is published in the federal register to include a link to a plain language 100word summary of the rule. Why im simp thympathetic to th goal, i have several concerns with this bill. As just feel good legislation that does little to improve the rule making process. First, the code of federal regulations already requires agencies to include short summaries as part of a notice of proposed rule making. Additionally, section 553 outlines a series of requirement f of rules and the issues involved in addition to other requirements. Second, i have concerns that although this summary requirement may be benign on its face, it could form the basis for vacating a rule under section 706 of the apa. There is no generally accepted definition of the term, plain langua language, which would require courts to determine whether a summary was adequately plain. And finally, many administrative experts have called on congress to call additional requirements in the rule making process, which is inflexible in responding to Public Health and safety threats. As i noted earlier, this is potentially due politictive of existing law and does little to address the overarching concerns with rule making. I strongly oppose this legislation and urge my colleagues to do the same and before i close, however, i would ask that the statement and amendment of my colleague, Sheila Jackson lee, who could not be here tonight to testify personally, be made a part of this record. Thank you very much. Thank you and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. Thank you very much. I assume all four members have had an opportunity to address the committee on their concerns that they came here for. Thank you very much. Rarely, do i find that any piece of legislation nails exactly everything the way it should be done. Off everybodys evaluation. This is being presented to the rules committee because as an example, president obamas first five years in office, the annual Regulatory Burden on americans has increased by nearly 73 billion. With a total of 157 new major regulations being imposed. I think its awesome to have people run for president. I think there has to be some sort of a process that is imposed. I think what has been talked about today could have some unintended consequences perhaps. But i would say that i think that what we have to do here is to put an end to this 73 billion in six years of 157 new major projects. Regulations on the american people. I think that one group of unelected bureaucrats should not put off on the american people. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate your comments about this legislation being right on target, but i know you meant to say ta it would be really, really great legislation if it included my amendments. Well i will revise and extend my remarks accordingly. So, im going to use my brief time to mention my amendments, if you dont mind, and try to speed the process up just a little bit. I am very much in favor of these two pieces of legislation. And i want to say that my amendment to title ii of hr 712, the alert act, would require agencies to include in their monthly report, where the rules in the pipeline impose Unfunded Mandates on state or local governments or on the private sector. You know, 1995, the Congress Passed was strong bipartisan support, the unfund eed mandate bill, but the bureaucrats you talked about have found many ways to get around those. That also requires to include in its annual cumulative assessment of new regulations, the total cost of Unfunded Mandates. And as you point out, the cost of the regulations coming out of not just this president , but certainly, really agree jous under this president , but of any administration. Is burdensome. But particularly burdensome when we put them on other, when state and local governments, even on the private sector, so, i want to say i support this legislation very much. And i hope that the committee will support my two amendments. And with that, i would yield back balance of my time. Thank you. Chairman, i ask unanimous consent to put the statement of the Administration Policy into the record. Yield back my time. Thank you very much. The gentleman, does any republican seek time . Does any democrat seek time . Let me look at all four of you and tell you youve done an excellent job. Youve given us today a presentation of an understand of important activities that go on that impact america, that impacts our judicial system. And that youve brought forth good arguments i believe on both sides of that. The rules committee as you know handles legislation where were here for hours and hours and youve caught us at the end of a few of those hours and i appreciate all four of you being to the point of what youve done. We have our top stenographer here and for her to properly prepare the reports necessary, she would love to have you leave anything that you brought in writing for her to complete that task. I want to thank all four of you for your time. I know a good number of you hung out for a lot of time this afternoon and i want to welcome you back and with we appreciate your taking time to be with us today. Thank you. Yes, sir. Mr. Moreno. Were going to put that all together. Did you give your testimony you choose . I had, i thought i had asked we did not, but would be glad to submit it for the record. That would be awesome. Everybody agree . Yes. I knew some did, thats why i asked did everyone give the full presentation. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman, for the time. Thank you very much. This now is there any other member that would wish to seek recognition to be heard on an amendment or any other piece of business related to these provisions that we have spoken about, hr 712 and hr 1155. Seeing none, the hearing portion of this is now closed. And a the chairman would be in receipt of a motion from the gentlewoman from grandfathered committee, north carolina, the vice chairman of the committee, dr. Fox. Thank you, mr. Chairman. A move the committee move a rule to hr 3762, the restoring Americans Health carefree dom reconciliation act of 2015. The rule makes an order of motion offered by the chair of the committee on the budget or is designated that the house concur in the house and nat amendments. The rule waves off points of order against consideration of the moment. The rule provides amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. Equally divided and control by the chair and rankinging member on the committee or their representative designees. Second two provides that 3b1 is amended by striking quote, the first session of end quote. Youve now heard the motion. In her motion on the Senate Amendment to hr 3762, what is known as reconciliation, is there an amendment or dis