Chairman Goodlatte Statement at OIRA Oversight Hearing

Chairman Goodlatte: This hearing is timely, coming just after Independence Day.  Among the grievances that the Declaration of Independence lodged against King George was overregulation:  “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.” Unfortunately, the problem has resurfaced.  Last year, employment at regulatory agencies hit an all-time high of 277,000.  In 2014, rules from administrative agencies outnumbered laws passed by Congress sixteen-to-one.  There has been a dramatic power shift in these United States from elected officials to unaccountable bureaucrats at federal regulatory agencies. In theory, agencies are governed by legislation like the Administrative Procedure Act, as well as executive orders, designed to ensure transparent, quality rulemaking that is responsive to the people, balances costs and benefits, and is faithful to the intent of Congress. In practice though, too many administrations have not adhered to these procedures in good faith. The Obama Administration, in particular, has taken advantage of the system to ram through radical, controversial and sweeping policy changes contrary to the will of Congress and the views of large segments of the voting public.  Serious reforms are needed to curb these abuses. At key stages in the rulemaking process, the Administration has ignored or subverted common sense rulemaking procedures that stood in the way of their policy goals. For example, instead of using required Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) to determine whether regulation is necessary, agencies produce them in a perfunctory way, after the decision to regulate has already been made.  A Mercatus Center study found that in essentially 87% of cases, agencies embarked on costly regulations without significant evidence that there was a problem or a precise idea of what they needed to fix. Similarly, agencies make questionable certifications that rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities in order to avoid requirements designed to help rein in impacts on small businesses. While the Obama Administration pays lip service to the virtues of cost-benefit analysis, it routinely uses technical gimmicks like non-standard discount rates and excessive reliance on co-benefits to ensure its preferred outcomes. The Administration is also exploiting the Administrative Procedure Act’s interpretive rules exception to impose dramatic and controversial policy changes without notice-and-comment or public participation.  These include an unprecedented 30 guidance documents from the Department of Education straining the application of civil rights laws into controversial areas well beyond their intended scope. Unfortunately, whether with regard to highly controversial rules, like EPA’s Waters of the United States rule, Clean Power Plan rules, or Utility MACT rule, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) has proven ineffective at preventing regulatory abuses, particularly when the costs are highest and it matters most. To be sure, in some cases, OIRA has improved the quality of rulemaking.  However, that just underscores the need for fundamental regulatory reform in the face of Executive Branch abuses in the most high-profile cases. This hearing is an opportunity to lay before the American public precisely how the President’s “I have got a pen” approach has exploited the weaknesses in the regulatory system.  That is the legacy of the Obama Administration.  For eight years, it has abused discretion that Congress delegated in good faith.  Serious and comprehensive reform is needed. I look forward to exploring with the witnesses both the problem and its solutions. ###