Reduce Exacerbated Inflation Negatively Impacting the Nation Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, the amendment strikes the bill's requirement for an inflation impact assessment when an executive order will have a significant impact on inflation, but the impact cannot yet be precisely quantified.
That is exactly the wrong approach to take. If the White House can determine an executive order will indeed have a significant impact on inflation, that is what is important. The President should know about that before he acts.
It would be unwise and dangerous to happily let the President proceed in the dark about an order's inflationary impacts just because they cannot be calculated with perfect precision.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, this amendment defines a ``significant impact on inflation'' as only an impact that would increase or decrease the Consumer Price Index by at least 1 percentage point.
With all due respect, that is magical thinking. If a single executive order were to produce a full 1 percentage point increase in inflation, that would not be just a significant effect; it would be a massive effect.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics' inflation data from January 23, 2023, showed that the Consumer Price Index rose 6.4 percent over the prior year. A 1 percent point rise would constitute 16 percent of that yearly rise. That is a huge portion of yearly inflation.
Few individual executive orders, even ones that stoke inflation significantly, would on their own raise inflation by 1 full percentage point or more.
What the amendment really is trying to do is gut the bill.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for further clarifying our intent.
Usually, inflation, by the economists, is around 2 percent. To have this amendment that indicates 1 percent, it gives some clarity of a significant impact.
I would say this: I believe in oversight, but I don't believe in obstruction, intrusion, and stopping work that impacts the American people.
My amendment provides clarity so that the work for the American people can go forward. It is evident that President Biden has had a significant impact on bringing down inflation and building a better quality of life.
Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee amendment No. 7, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, this amendment is similar to my colleague's last amendment. It defines a ``quantifiable inflationary impact'' as only an impact that would increase or decrease the Consumer Price Index by at least 1 percentage point.
If a given executive order did not have that level of impact, the bill, if amended this way, would require no inflation impact assessment.
But as my colleague's prior amendment, this amendment would not improve the bill, but instead gut the bill.
Letting off the hook all executive orders with less than 1 percentage point impact on the Consumer Price Index would mean that all or virtually all orders would be off the hook. That includes those with obviously significant inflationary effects.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Madam Chair, I yield myself the balance of my time to close.
Madam Chair, let me quickly say that, again, the Jackson Lee amendment before us is keeping in line with nationally recognized standards.
Many economists agree that a quantifiable inflationary impact is deemed to occur when there is an increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index inflation by at least 1 percent and over the course of a year. It will not gut the bill. It will let us try to understand the bill.
While H.R. 347 is a clear overreach and would impose improper and onerous restrictions upon the executive branch, the Jackson Lee amendment tries to find some common ground that will be offered to this body as a mere attempt to help ensure that the inappropriate limitations as prescribed by this legislation are curtailed in its effort to limit the authority of the executive orders.
Madam Chair, I ask my colleagues to consider and vote for the Jackson Lee amendment No. 8, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I rise in support of this amendment.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, my colleague's amendment states an obvious fact: It is the responsibility of both the President and the House of Representatives to combat inflation. I have no quarrel with that.
In fact, in advancing this bill, the House is taking one step toward fulfilling its responsibility to combat inflation.
It is doing so by using this legislative authority to help ensure that the President focuses on combating inflation, not issuing executive orders that make inflation worse.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, as the designee of Mr. Andy Ogles, I have an amendment at the desk.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
My colleague's amendment makes sure that inflation assessments prepared under the bill will address a critical inflationary measure-- the Producer Price Index.
Now, when people think of inflation, they usually think of the Consumer Price Index. But the Producer Price Index is critical as well. It measures changes in the selling prices domestic producers receive for their output. These prices are from the very first commercial transactions for many products and services. Thus, changes in the Producer Price Index can signal that changes in prices are about to ripple through the economy.
These should be accounted for in each inflation impact assessment that the bill requires.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I have no more speakers, and I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. LANGWORTHY. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Bean of Florida) having assumed the chair, Ms. Lee of Florida, Acting Chair of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 347) to require the Executive Office of the President to provide an inflation estimate with respect to Executive orders with a significant effect on the annual gross budget, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source