National Regulatory Budget
Congressman Steve Scalise (R-La.-01)
Unnecessary regulatory costs place American businesses and innovators at a competitive disadvantage within the global economy. Since I was elected to Congress in 2008, one of my top priorities has been reining in regulations and cutting red tape. Washington’s out-of-control federal regulations not only strangle small businesses and job creators but also stifle economic opportunity and increase the costs of everything Americans purchase, including food, gas, and, of course, health care.
Too often, these regulations are crafted by unelected bureaucrats, are written in a broad, blunt manner that sets unachievable standards, and are ineffective in achieving their desired benefits. With no incentive to fix past measures, federal regulations pile up fast and high.
The annual cost of excessive regulations created by unelected Washington bureaucrats adds up to approximately $1.86 trillion. Broken down, that equates to approximately $15,000 in regulatory costs per American family each year. That represents nearly 30 percent of the average household income, which is unacceptable. Our government should be empowering individuals, providing families peace of mind, and creating the right environment for businesses to thrive and create jobs, not burdening them with excessive regulations.
Unfortunately for families and businesses, the government is riddled with examples of these regulations. From the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) limiting our energy industry to the Department of Health and Human Services implementing Obamacare, regulations are coming out of Washington at a hurried pace, and their effects are being felt across our country.
In my home state of Louisiana, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has imposed unrealistic wetland-mitigation regulations. Radical environmental regulations developed by unelected Corps bureaucrats threaten communities throughout south Louisiana and increase the cost of critical hurricane protection projects. There is no doubt that wetland mitigation is crucial to the survival of south Louisiana, but mitigation policies need to be realistic and should not be mutually exclusive to economic development and the protection of life and property. The Corps must be aware of the impact its regulations have on local communities and work with Congress and local officials to ensure that they are brought forward responsibly and with accountability.
In some instances, multiple agencies have jurisdiction over an issue or industry, creating a multilayered regulatory structure and driving up compliance costs, which are passed along to hardworking taxpayers. For example, the EPA, the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission are tasked with implementing the wide array of regulations that affect the electric utility industry. Ultimately, these regulations affect the cost of every American’s electricity bills.
I have also vehemently opposed the repeated attempts by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet through so-called net neutrality regulations. This is yet another example of this administration’s radical effort to have the government take over more aspects of our economy where there is no justification.
There is no market failure to justify Internet regulation, and the FCC has never conducted a cost-benefit analysis to support its efforts. Regulation based on speculation should not happen, and certainly not to one of the most successful sectors of our economy. Regulating the Internet would send the wrong message — regulation trumps innovation — in the Internet ecosystem. The best way to guarantee a vibrant Internet economy is by keeping the federal government out of the way, not getting it more involved.
Now, no one is arguing that there should be zero regulation. Regulations serve a purpose when protecting the health and well-being of individuals and our environment. For example, we want to know that the cup of water we get from our kitchen sink is safe to drink. But the power to regulate should not be all encompassing and, just as important, should not be abused.
Congress must keep federal agencies in check and prevent them from issuing excessive regulations. We must also ensure that regulations are transparent, based on facts, and issued only after a thorough examination of the potential costs and benefits. It is for these reasons that I introduced the National Regulatory Budget Act of 2014 (HR 5184), legislation that would reform the estimation and reporting of the economic costs of existing and new federal regulations and establish an annual cap of regulatory costs for each federal agency.
Specifically, the National Regulatory Budget Act would establish the Office of Regulatory Analysis (ORA), which would be required to provide an annual regulatory analysis of federal rules for the upcoming fiscal year and their estimated cost on the economy. The legislation would also create a National Regulatory Budget, which would allow Congress to set a cap on the total economic cost of new federal regulations to be implemented in the coming fiscal year.
The legislation would require all newly proposed regulations to receive an ORA estimate before being implemented. Agencies that fail to comply with the ORA will be subject to a 0.5 percent reduction in their appropriation based on their previous budget amount. By analyzing regulations, the ORA would bring much-needed oversight to the regulatory process and make regulations more efficient and less costly.
I was proud to team up with Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who introduced similar legislation in the Senate, on this innovative reform effort. This much-needed legislation makes unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in Washington think twice before proposing job-killing rules and regulations by increasing transparency and accountability. If our economy is to recover from six years of the president’s failed economic policies, we must rein in the out-of-control costs of this administration’s radical regulations.
We must also make sure that, whenever possible, regulations include clear guidance. To better protect our booming energy and manufacturing sectors, I introduced the Promoting New Manufacturing Act (HR 4795) in the 113th Congress. This legislation requires the EPA to issue guidance for industry compliance when it proposes new rules setting air quality standards. The EPA has provided this guidance in the past after issuing new standards. HR 4795 simply makes that guidance a prospective requirement; if it is not issued, the rules have no force or effect. This legislation makes the EPA accountable to those it regulates and brings certainty to businesses that must comply with the new standards.
The 2013 Federal Register contained nearly 3,500 regulations totaling 79,000 pages — the fourth-largest Federal Register in history. Clearly, Congress has ceded a great deal of authority to agencies and entrusted them too often to implement legislation through regulation. Congress must not allow this to trump our responsibility to ensure that regulations are based on common sense and sound analysis and not created to serve political goals. We also have a responsibility to prevent regulations from creating uncertainty and driving up the costs of services, like electricity bills and broadband Internet.
That is why I believe we need new, bold solutions to fix our broken regulatory process. Those solutions do not exist in our current system, but I have introduced two bills that would help change that. The National Regulatory Budget Act of 2014 would establish an incentive for federal agencies to reform the regulatory process once and for all by eliminating the hurdles and barriers that are holding back our economy and ultimately resulting in better government. The Promoting New Manufacturing Act would ensure that our energy and manufacturing industries are not subject to vague regulations that create uncertainty and hinder compliance.
By eliminating burdensome, costly regulations, we can put more money back into peoples’ pockets so it can be spent on things like housing, groceries, and education, rather than fees and compliance costs. By requiring Washington bureaucrats to find more cost-effective, common-sense ways to implement laws passed by Congress, Congress can protect the wages, pocketbooks, and opportunities of hardworking Americans. Simply put, we can make the American dream easier to achieve.
