Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, in 1995, Congress passed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, or UMRA, to prevent the imposition of burdensome and costly Federal unfunded mandates. Over the course of this Congress, the Oversight and Government Reform Committee has developed a record that clearly shows UMRA has fallen short of its original goals.
Last year, the committee sought input on UMRA and received several hundred responses from Governors, State legislators, and county officials regarding the impact of Federal laws and regulations.
Too often, State and local governments are confronted with the rotten choice of raising taxes on their residents or cutting services residents depend on in order to comply with Federal mandates. Unfunded federal mandates strain State and local budgets, and subvert the principles of American federalism.
Federal agencies treat States as servants to their regulatory whims, rather than as partners to consult before imposing new, burdensome mandates.
In an April 2017 hearing, a Kentucky county executive testified that Federal agencies treat their responsibilities under UMRA as an exercise to ``check a box,'' rather than an opportunity to engage in a meaningful intergovernmental partnership.
H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act, is designed to solve these problems. It will improve the quality of regulatory and legislative analysis and close the current loophole which allows an agency to bypass UMRA analysis by not issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking.
According to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office, 35 percent of major rules are issued without a notice of proposed rulemaking. That means more than one-third of the regulations with the greatest impact on the economy are excluded from UMRA's cost-benefit and other analyses.
H.R. 50 also expands the definition of direct costs to ensure economic analysis considers foregone profits, costs passed on to consumers, and behavioral changes.
Requiring Federal regulatory agencies and the Congressional Budget Office to include all anticipated costs in cost estimates will help ensure that analyses are complete and provide an accurate description of the full effects of regulations and legislation.
H.R. 50 enhances transparency, accountability, and communication between the Federal Government and State, local, Tribal, or private sector partners. It requires Federal agencies to engage in a more thorough regulatory process by codifying key provisions of President Clinton's Executive Order 12866. These principles were reaffirmed by President Obama in Executive Order 13563 and are consistent with President Trump's executive orders on regulatory reform.
Under UMRA, agencies are required to consult with State, local, and Tribal governments when developing significant regulatory mandates. H.R. 50 extends this requirement to the private sector, which is similarly burdened by unfunded Federal regulatory mandates.
The bill also requires independent agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Federal Communications Commission to comply with UMRA.
Finally, H.R. 50 extends judicial review to help ensure agencies carefully consider the least costly and least burdensome regulatory alternative, giving courts the authority to stay regulations for noncompliance with UMRA. These changes are critical to achieving what Congress set out to do when UMRA was passed in 1995.
Requiring greater transparency and improving analysis prior to imposing Federal mandates is not a partisan goal. State and local governments headed by Republicans and Democrats alike are affected by unfunded Federal mandates.
Businesses throughout the country have invested time and resources to comply with Federal mandates. With such a sweeping impact, any decision to impose a Federal mandate should, at a minimum, be transparent and based on the most comprehensive and accurate information available.
It is for this reason that our bill is supported by a vast coalition of nonpartisan, nonprofit organizations made up of United States State and local government officials.
Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record letters from these coalitions, which includes the United States Conference of Mayors, the National League of Cities, the International City/County Management Association, the National Association of Counties, the Council of State Governments, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and the National Governors Association. NFIB, Washington, DC, March 14, 2018. Hon. Virginia Foxx, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Foxx: On behalf of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), the nation's leading small business advocacy organization, I am writing in support of H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017. This legislation makes critical improvements to the regulatory review process.
In a recent NFIB National Small Business Poll, almost half of small businesses surveyed viewed regulation as a ``very serious'' (25 percent) or ``somewhat serious'' (24 percent) problem. Additionally, 51 percent of small business owners reported an increase in the number of regulations impacting their business over the previous three years.
H.R. 50 requires that federal agencies abide by explicit criteria when assessing potential impacts of regulatory actions, and further stipulates that the cumulative impacts of the regulatory burden be considered. The legislation enhances Congressional authority in regulatory oversight, requiring agencies to review existing regulations upon the request of a committee chair or ranking member. In addition, the legislation transfers authority under the current unfunded mandates law from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), whose staff is better equipped to handle such work.
Thank you for leading on this important legislation. We look forward to working with you on reforming the regulatory process as the 115th Congress moves forward. Sincerely, Juanita D. Duggan, President & CEO, NFIB. ____ Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, Washington, DC, March 14, 2018. Hon. Trey Gowdy, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Elijah Cummings, Ranking Member, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Gowdy and Ranking Member Cummings: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports H.R. 50, the ``Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017.''
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) requires agencies to undertake a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the anticipated costs and benefits of the federal mandate before promulgating a final rule. For rules costing over $100 million, UMRA requires the agency to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and select the least costly, most cost- effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. Alternatively, the head of the agency must publish with the final rule an explanation of why the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome method of achieving the rule's objectives was not chosen.
However, agencies routinely engineer the regulatory process to avoid UMRA's requirements. The Government Accountability Office has found that many statutes and final rules containing significant unfunded mandates were enacted or published without being identified as federal mandates at or above UMRA's thresholds. Worst of all, there is no mechanism to obtain meaningful judicial review for UMRA violations, so agencies can easily get away with skirting the law's requirements.
H.R. 50 would fix many of these problems. It would close loopholes that agencies use to circumvent UMRA and provide for enhanced stakeholder participation, meaningful UMRA oversight, and judicial review. The bill would also enhance the ability of Congress to identify unfunded mandates in legislation it considers. The Chamber urges you to vote in favor of this bipartisan legislation, and to report it to the full House as expeditiously as practicable. Sincerely, Neil L. Bradley. ____ March 13, 2018. Re The Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act (H.R. 50/S. 1523). Hon. Ron Johnson, Chairman, Senate Committee on Homeland, Security and Governmental Affairs, Washington, DC. Hon. Trey Gowdy, Chairman, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Washington, DC. Hon. Claire McCaskill, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Washington, DC. Hon. Elijah Cummings, Ranking Member, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Johnson and McCaskill and Representatives Gowdy and Cummings: On behalf of the Big 7, a coalition of national organizations representing state and local officials, we applaud your efforts to make improvements to the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995. Monitoring federal regulations and planning for unfunded mandates continues to be one of the most pressing issues for state and local leaders. In particular, we support strengthening the required analysis of pending legislation and your call for a strong regulatory look-back process. This additional information is critical for improving both the legislative and regulatory processes.
As you know, UMRA was designed to limit the imposition of unfunded federal mandates on state, local, and tribal governments by requiring the Congressional Budget Office and regulatory agencies to provide a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the anticipated costs of legislation and certain regulations, respectively. As UMRA begins its third decade, the goal of curbing ``the practice of imposing unfunded Federal mandates on State and local governments'' is even more important.
A past report by the White House Office of Management and Budget stated federal regulations and unfunded mandates cost states, cities and the general public between $44 and $62 billion each year. With many states and local governments facing revenue restrictions and growing local financial burdens, the federal government should avoid imposing any new unfunded mandates. Moreover, federal regulatory agencies should work more closely with state and local governments and other stakeholders during the rule-making process to gather input and identify practical solutions.
We commend you for your leadership in advocating the enactment of this legislation, and we look forward to working with you and your staff to ensure its passage. Sincerely, David Adkins,
CEO and Executive Director, The Council of State Governments. Matthew D. Chase,
Executive Director, National Association of Counites. Scott Pattison,
Executive Director, National Governors Association. Clarence Anthony,
CEO and Executive Director, National League of Cities. Marc Ott,
Executive Director, International City/County Management Association. William T. Pound,
Executive Director, National Conference of State Legislatures. Tom Cochran,
CEO and Executive Director, The U.S. Conference of Mayors.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 50 ensures the commonsense goals Congress intended when enacting UMRA in 1995 are in fact realized and improved upon. I thank the bipartisan group of Members who cosponsored and support this bill.
Mr. Chairman, I encourage all Members to support H.R. 50, and I reserve the balance of my time. House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC, June 25, 2018. Hon. Steve Womack, Chairman, Committee on the Budget, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: On March 15, 2018, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ordered reported H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017, with an amendment, by recorded vote. The bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, with additional referrals to the Committees on Budget, Rules, and the Judiciary.
I ask you allow the Committee on the Budget to be discharged from further consideration of the bill to expedite floor consideration. This discharge in no way affects your jurisdiction over the subject matter of the bill, and it will not serve as precedent for future referrals. In addition, should a conference on the bill be necessary, I would support your request to have the Committee on the Budget represented on the conference committee. Finally, I would be pleased to include this letter and any response in the bill report filed by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding.
Thank you for your consideration of my request. Sincerely, Trey Gowdy. ____ House of Representatives, Committee on the Budget, Washington, DC, June 26, 2018. Hon. Trey Gowdy, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Gowdy: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017.
The bill contains provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Budget. In order to expedite House consideration of H.R. 50, the Committee on the Budget will forgo action on the bill. This is being done with the understanding that it does not in any way prejudice the Committee with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this or similar legislation. I also ask that the Committee on the Budget be appropriately consulted and involved as this bill or similar legislation moves forward so that the Committee may address any remaining issues that fall within its jurisdiction. The Committee on the Budget also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation. I also request that you include this letter and your response as part of your committee's report on H.R. 50 and in the Congressional Record during floor consideration.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. I look forward to working with you as this bill moves through the Congress. Sincerely, Steve Womack, Chairman, Committee on the Budget. ____ House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC, June 27, 2018. Hon. Pete Sessions, Chairman, Committee on Rules, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: On March 15, 2018, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ordered reported H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017, with an amendment, by recorded vote. The bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, with additional referrals to the Committees on Budget, Rules, and the Judiciary.
I ask you allow the Committee on Rules to be discharged from further consideration of the bill to expedite floor consideration. This discharge in no way affects your jurisdiction over the subject matter of the bill, and it will not serve as precedent for future referrals. In addition, should a conference on the bill be necessary, I would support your request to have the Committee on Rules represented on the conference committee. Finally, I would be pleased to include this letter and any response in the bill report filed by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding.
Thank you for your consideration of my request. Sincerely, Trey Gowdy. ____ House of Representatives, Committee on Rules, Washington, DC, June 27, 2018. Hon. Trey Gowdy Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Gowdy: Thank you for your letter on H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandate and Information Technology Act of 2017, which your Committee ordered reported on March 15, 2018.
Because of your willingness to consult with my committee regarding this matter, I will waive consideration of the bill by the Rules Committee. By agreeing to waive its consideration of the bill, the Rules Committee does not waive its jurisdiction over H.R. 50. In addition, the Committee on Rules reserves its authority to seek conferees on any provisions of the bill that are within its jurisdiction during any House-Senate conference that may be convened on this legislation. I ask your commitment to support any request by the Committee on Rules for conferees on H.R. 50 or related legislation.
I also request that you include this letter and your response as part of your Committee's report on the bill and in the Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank you for your attention to these matters. Sincerely, Pete Sessions, Chairman, House Committee on Rules. ____ House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC, June 28, 2018. Hon. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017. As you know, on March 15, 2018, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform ordered reported the bill with an amendment, by recorded vote. The bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, with additional referrals to the Committees on Budget, Rules, and the Judiciary.
I thank you for allowing the Committee on the Judiciary to be discharged from further consideration of the bill to expedite floor consideration. This discharge in no way affects your jurisdiction over the subject matter of the bill, and it will not serve as precedent for future referrals. In addition, should a conference on the bill be necessary, I would support your request to have the Committee on the Judiciary represented on the conference committee.
I would be pleased to include this letter and any response in the bill report filed by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding. Sincerely, Trey Gowdy. ____ House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC, June 28, 2018. Hon. Trey Gowdy, Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Gowdy: I write with respect to H.R. 50, the ``Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act.'' As a result of your having consulted with us on provisions within H.R. 50 that fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, I forego any further consideration of this bill so that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor for consideration.
The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 50 at this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject matter contained in this or similar legislation and that our committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as this bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this or similar legislation and asks that you support any such request.
I would appreciate a response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 50 and would ask that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 50. Sincerely, Bob Goodlatte, Chairman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, we have often heard that the most dangerous words or the most dangerous phrase in the English language is, ``We are from the Federal Government, and we are here to help.'' I agree with that.
Everywhere I go in my district, I hear from people, It isn't the laws that we pass, it's the regulations that implement those laws that are the biggest problems.
Unfortunately, many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe that government bureaucrats are the smartest people in the world. In fact, they are smarter than the majority of the American people who make this country great.
We absolutely do not want to do away with all rules and regulations. We want safe food. We want safe drinking water. We want all those things that help make this country great, but we want to bring some common sense and some transparency to the regulatory process. That is what H.R. 50 does.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that independent agencies need oversight as much as any other agencies. They already submit regulatory products to the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OIRA, including information collection requests under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
The Administrative Conference of the United States has recommended greater oversight of independent agencies for decades. The American Bar Association did the same in 1990 and reaffirmed the need in 2016 saying: ``We strongly urge you to bring the independent regulatory commissions within the requirements for cost-benefit analysis and retrospective review of rules currently reflected in Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563.''
I want to point out that both of these executive orders were promulgated by Democrat Presidents.
In 2011, Sally Katzen, OIRA Administrator under the Clinton administration, urged expanded oversight of independent agencies. She wrote: ``Our concern is that independent agencies are not typically engaged in the analysis that has come to be expected as a form of governmental best practices for regulatory agencies.''
This bill simply requires independent agencies to undertake the same cost-benefit analysis and reporting requirements as other regulatory agencies. There is no threat to their independence.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Cuellar).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chair, I yield the gentleman from Texas an additional 30 seconds.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, we have heard time and again of the burdens the Federal Government imposes on State, local, and Tribal governments. We have also heard from businesses throughout the country, both large and small, that have to forego investments in employees and infrastructure in order to comply with these mandates.
Congress passed the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act in 1995 to require the Federal Government to think twice before imposing unfunded mandates. And let me say, that bill passed, I believe, with unanimous support from both the House and the Senate. If not unanimous, it was overwhelming, over 400 votes in the House and, I believe, 98 votes in the Senate.
Of course, in the 23 years since passage, the bureaucrats in the Federal Government have found ways around many of those requirements. As I pointed out in my opening remarks, the GAO has reported that 35 percent, more than one-third of major rules, are issued without a notice of proposed rulemaking so that the public has no idea what is coming out in the rulemaking in advance. It is time to make sure UMRA works as Congress intended.
Again, I am fascinated sometimes by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who don't want to take responsibility for our actions and want to give over the running of the entire government to the executive branch. It makes absolutely no sense to me. I am not sure why some run for office if they don't want to take on their responsibilities.
Legislative and regulatory decisions should be made in consideration of all of the available information, not just part of it. The government should consider every option before imposing unnecessary burdens on the States, localities, and even private enterprise.
H.R. 50 closes UMRA's loopholes and enhances transparency, accountability, and communication between the Federal Government and State, local, Tribal, and private sector partners.
We do not do away with all rulemaking. We do not want to make food, water, housing, all those things that are regulated for the good of the American people, we don't want to do away with those. We simply want to have more transparency and understand the cost of the regulations.
H.R. 50 codifies bipartisan regulatory principles, enhances required analysis, adds independent agencies to the cost-benefit analysis requirements, extends judicial review to hold agencies accountable, and improves stakeholder consultation.
I urge adoption of the bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the gentlewoman's amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would strike a key provision of H.R. 50, requiring independent agencies to comply with UMRA.
The purpose of H.R. 50 is to require comprehensive analysis before agencies impose unfunded mandates on State, local, or Tribal governments and the private sector.
Regulations must be fully analyzed and imposed only after impacted parties have been consulted. That should be the case whether the regulations come from a Cabinet department or an independent agency.
From fiscal year 1997 to fiscal year 2016, independent agencies issued 275 major rules. Those rules imposed significant costs on our economy and often included mandates on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector, just the same as rules that came from non-independent agencies.
Because independent agencies are excluded from UMRA, excluded from regulatory process requirements in Executive Order No. 12866, and excluded from review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, few independent agencies conduct cost-benefit analyses.
In FY 2016, independent agencies issued 18 major regulations, but only a third of those rules included monetized cost analysis and not one rule included any analysis of monetized benefits.
The cost-benefit analyses required by UMRA are essential for a transparent and accountable regulatory system, and eliminating section 5 would be inconsistent with the intent of H.R. 50. This bill seeks to close loopholes, not preserve them.
Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN. Mr. Chairman, can you tell me how much time I have remaining.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, the real goal of this bill is to require transparency on the part of independent agencies and not to have a nefarious impact on those independent agencies.
Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support this amendment.
This amendment requires a record of any consultation with a non- Federal party and requires agencies to post any comments submitted by a non-Federal party to their website within 5 days.
Transparency is a bipartisan priority and is a key feature of many regulatory process requirements.
For instance, the Administrative Procedures Act generally requires Federal agencies to publish their proposed rules in the Federal Register for all to see and to give the public an opportunity to comment. Rulemaking dockets and public comments are increasingly available for public inspection online.
Groups, such as the Administrative Conference of the United States, have recommended that records of consultations and ex parte communications be disclosed and made a part of the rulemaking docket.
H.R. 50 seeks to introduce greater transparency in the regulatory process, and this amendment is consistent with that split.
I thank the gentleman from Maryland for offering the amendment and for working with me to expand its application and increase transparency.
Mr. Chairman, I urge Members to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would repeal H.R. 50 if GDP remains below 5 percent over the first four quarters after enactment.
H.R. 50 is not intended to raise the GDP. It is intended to ensure the Federal Government does not impose costs on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector without consulting those entities that are impacted by the regulation. The GDP does not reflect how a given regulatory mandate affects a particular government or private sector industry.
However, this amendment would tie the GDP to the future of the entire bill. H.R. 50 gives the private sector an opportunity to give Federal agencies information about how to craft reasonable and effective regulation. After all, State, local, and Tribal governments and private sector entities are often in the best position to anticipate how a proposed regulation will affect their operations.
H.R. 50 will help to ensure regulations that impose unfunded mandates are adequately analyzed in order to make these mandates the most effective and least burdensome they can be.
I urge Members to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, we, on our side of the aisle, join our colleague in stating our absolute abhorrence to domestic violence and sexual assault in this country. None of us want to see any incidents of sexual assault, domestic violence, or assault on children, obviously.
What we are concerned about, and what this bill can help do, is to help our local police and law enforcement have better opportunities to help to fight these terrible, terrible situations. I thank our colleague for her leadership in working with us on this side of the aisle and with all of us who have had a bipartisan effort on sex trafficking and sexual assault.
But, Mr. Speaker, I oppose the motion to recommit. We have been analyzing, debating, and voting on this bill to update the unfunded mandates reform for years. When UMRA was enacted 23 years ago, it was an important step to analyze the burdens of Federal legislation and regulations on State and local governments. But now it needs an update.
H.R. 50 would close loopholes in UMRA, enhance transparency and accountability, and increase communication with State and local governments.
Mr. Speaker, if the State and local governments didn't have to spend so much money on unnecessary things, perhaps they would be able to do more on the issues my colleague brought up.
Mr. Speaker, this is a bipartisan bill with a bipartisan amendment from the committee and a bipartisan amendment from the floor. Let's not let a bipartisan motion stop a fix to decades-old problems in all our districts, unfunded mandates.
H.R. 50 is good for State and local governments, the Federal Government, businesses, and, most importantly, it is good for the public. I urge my colleagues to oppose the motion to recommit. I support the underlying bill, and I yield back the balance of my time
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source