tv U.S. House of Representatives Legislative Business CSPAN July 11, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT
courts themselves have thus far recognized through their deference to agencies. 4768 4768 would upend the careful long standing balance among the three branches of government all in the name of serving anti-regulatory corporate interests. in addition, this measure would encourage judicial activism. by eliminating judicial difference, it would empower the courts to make public policy from the bench even though they may lack the specialized expertise and democratic accountability that agencies possess. through delegated authority and oversight by the american
people's executive representatives. although the supreme court had numerous opportunities to expand judicial review of rulemaking, thankfully the court has rejected this approach in recognition of the fact that generalist courts simply lack the subject matter expertise of agencies and politically unaccountable and should not engage in making substantive determinations from the bench. it is somewhat ironic that some who have long decried judicial activism will now support a greater role for the judiciary in agency rulemaking. and finally, 4768 would result in regulatory parallels cyst and
thereby undermine public health and safety. regulations are the result of years and very often years of careful deliberation and expert analysis. typically after an agency first proposes a rulemaking, it must solicit public comment. the agency then analyzes this input. and after further deliberation, promulgates the final rule. additionally for certain rules and agencies, just undergo further procedures, such as conducting a cost benefit analysis and a separate analysis of the rule's potential impact on small businesses. this is a time-consuming process that some believe is already too inflexible. i ask unanimous consent that the remainder of my statement be put
in the record and i reserve. the chair: without objection. the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: it's my pleasure to yield two minutes to the mr. eman from georgia, allen. mr. allen: i support legislation that works to scale back the administration's regulatory agencies and instead returns the interpretation of laws to the courts. for too long, unelected federal bureaucrats have been run ingram pant on our constitution, taking interpretations of the law further than congress intended them. 90% of my time has been spending 9 administration's overreach. it's sad. our founding fathers never
intended for bureaucrats to have this power. the power of law making is in this body. there are many examples out there as well, not only in the coal industry. west industry had the 10th best economy in this nation and now it's the worst. i have lots of electric membership corporations in my district and they spend billions of dollars upgrading their coal-powered plants, but they continue to be harassed by the e.p.a. it's time that this agency top-down approach is dealt with. it's not in the best interest of the folks in georgia. and the 12th district of georgia, let alone the rest of the country. it is time to get back to congress writing the laws and the courts interpreting them and dismantle the fourth branch of
this government. i'm proud to support this legislation that gives federal agencies a reality check. we wonder why the economy is not growing. you know everywhere i go, people say that the biggest restriction on this economy is the regulatory overreach. we must stop this. and that's why i'm proud to support the separation of powers restoration act and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. america is facing so many important issues that need to be addressed that this congress fuses to address and so it enders do-nothing bills like this that isn't going to pass in the senate and if it did, it would not be signed by the president.
but still this do-nothing congress persists in acting in this way. i would at this time, mr. speaker, like to yield to the gentlelady from the great state of texas, five minutes. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, for his leadership of he subcommittee which this legislation i believe has found its journey. let me acknowledge my colleague from texas. the judiciary committee, we have the benefit of the counsel of nonlawyers. it's a new phenomenon. when i first came on, we had only lawyers on the committee. but as a lawyer who remembers
tting in an administrative procedure law class by seasonned professor at the university of virginia law school, remembered he was embedded for decades and managed to make the administrative procedures act interesting. and the one thing i knew even as the unger law student, a.p.a. for 70's years -- at that time it served and guided administrative agencies and the affected public in a manner that is flexible enough to accommodate the variety of agencies operating under it inclusive of changes through time. and so what saddens me as a person who are enjoyed many aspects of law school and
understands and enjoys the deliberation of issues dealing with the question of law, is the complete fueling, in spite of my friends who view this as remedy. i would like to offer them my thoughts as to why this is not, because the legislation would allow federal courts reviewing an agency action to conduct a de novo review of all relevant questions of law without deferring to the legal interpretation of the agency. let me be very clear, i'm a student of the three branches of government. i appreciate my colleagues in this instance, republicans' concerned about the sanctity of the three branches of government as evidenced by the constitution. in that structure, we developed
agencies to have expertise, not to not be challenged, but to have expertise. and i want those listening to understand that i respect the challenge. but what this particular legislation is doing is that de novo, my friends, of course, is starting from scratch. so that means a regulation by the department of homeland security, i'm on the homeland security committee. this agency created after 9/11. and in the backdrop of what we have faced, the heinous acts of dallas, five fallen officers, 12 can't claim, now we this recent incident, allow me to offer my sympathies in michigan to bailiffs and i don't know how many were shot and killed, but we know we are in a different framework dealing with security. some of these are regulatory
schemes. transportation security administration. and to take that expertise on behalf of the american people and as they say throw the baby out with the bath water, say to the courts that do not have a discernible expertise, judges are quite skilled, but they are not the experts in every aspect of how this government runs, members of congress have to brief themselves to be able to assess what is going on in the government, and we have that responsibility. but you are asking the courts now to undo everybody regulation and become the expert on federal land, public land, on environmental protection agency issues, on health and human service issues, on issues dealing with homeland security, on issues dealing with education.
this is untenable, mr. chairman. this will not work. and i want to cite from you a number of groups that have come together, a coalition for sensible safeguards saying that congress should look for ways to identify gaps and new safeguards for the public. this legislation does the opposite by ensuring more delays. let me clarify their language because i will go further. i would be willing to looking at filling the holes of why -- an additional -- two minutes. mr. johnson: i would yield to the gentlewoman an additional two minutes. ms. jackson lee: i would be willing to look at discussing this further by looking at what are the holes, where do we think we are not being effective on behalf of the american people. that is reasonable legislation
and reasonable discourse, if you will. but i can't look at something that tells me that i have to take something involving the children's health jurns program or the 1191 waiver that will deals with medicaid and i have to untangle it and go into a court because someone challenged it and i have people waiting in line for health care relief and hospitals who are looking for a payment on uncompensated care and i have a court that now has to ramp up an -- and individual courts doesn't have the vastness to be experts on health care and experts on a variety of issues that are so very important to us. and i would hope that we could spend this -- send this legislation back. i hope to look and see what are we trying to fix. the three branches of government
are very clear. we legislate. the executive has its powers in their agencies, but the citizens have a right to seek a review of a regulatory structure or regulation. they have judicial review. section 702, the a.p.a. subjects rulemaking to judicial review for any person suffering legal wrong because of agency action or adversely affected or agrieved by agency action. courts in particular retain an important role in determining whether an agency action is appropriate, arbitrary or ca appreciateous. that is what this administrative procedures act does and has been effective for 30-years-plus. we are tangling and blocking the good government work that these agencies do to help the american people be safe in water, the public lands, in security. i ask my colleagues, let's go
back to the drawing boards before we move forward on this legislation. i yield back. the chair: gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: i believe this side has the right to close and . have one speaker to -- left the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: i would yield to the gentlelady from texas for purposes of asking for unanimous consent to allow certain documents into the record. the chair: without objection. the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman. i ask unanimous consent to put in the record the statement of administration policy of the president's veto threat and the coalition for sensible safeguards. the chair: without objection. the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: with that, i would
yield three minutes to the gentleman from michigan. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for three minutes. mr. conyers: i thank my friend from georgia. members of the house, i'm not .lone in opposing h.r. 4678 in recognition of the many serious concerns presented by it . the coalition for sensible safeguards is an alliance of more than 150. 150 consumer more than 150 consumer, research, faith and other public interest groups who strongly oppose this is legislation. these are, in effect, the good guys. public citizens. the afl-cio. the service employees international union.
the united steelworkers. the center for progressive reform of. -- reform. 24 ethe consumers union. the consumer federation of america. the natural resources defense council. the sierra club. and many, many more. in addition, leading administrative law scholars also oppose 4768 because it will further delay the rule making rocess because it presents separation of powers concerns. like me, these organizations and scholars know that this bill -- weaken the regulatory will weaken the regulatory system by supplanting agency expertise and congressional
authority with judicial activism. in closing, i urge my colleagues to join me in opposing h.r. 4768 , a bill that, without doubt, would undermine public health and safety and undermine our regulatory safety net. i want to now yield back to mr. johnson, thank him for the great job he's done here on the floor, and ask him to close this debate. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. in sum, it is indude ironic that the so-called separation of powers restoration act actually raises separation of powers concerns by yielding legislative power over to the judicial
ranch. and this is in part why there are so many alliances and labor organizations, consumer organizations, environmental action organizations, and others that strongly oppose this legislation. i would ask that a july 11, 2016, letter from consumers union opposing this legislation, along with a letter from the national -- or from the natural resources defense council opposing this legislation, i'd ask that by unanimous consent they be made a part of the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. johnson: and lastly i would point out that there's a strongly worded veto threat by the president about this
legislation, should it ever find its way to the senate and to the president's desk. the president points out that this legislation is not in the public interest, and that it would add needless complexity and delay to the judicial review of regulatory action. for those reasons, among others, he has issued a veto threat and so this is a piece of legislation that is a messaging piece. my friends on the other side of the aisle know that it's not going anywhere, but it is promoting their mess abbling, which is deregulation despite all the regulation and legislation needed to address pertinent issues that the american people are demanding action on right now. the zika virus. puerto rico.
gun violence. and gun reform. legislation. so many other things that we could and should be working on but instead we are enslaled here with these messaging bills that are not going -- we are enthralled here with these messaging bills that are not going anywhere. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the list of organizations that stand up for separation of powers that stand up for liberty that stand up for common sense, is long, includes the american farm bureau federation, tech freedom, the american consumer institute, americans for tax reform, the center for freedom and prosperity, the competitive enterprise institute, digital liberty, free the people, the independent women's forum,
institute for liberty, the mississippi cent for public policy, protect internet freedom, the taxpayers protection alliance, and tech knowledge just to name some. mr. speaker, mr. chairman this legislation is very important. it will pass this house with a strong vote. it needs to be taken up by the united states senate. it needs to be signed into law by the president of the united states. but it will also be heard across the street at the united states supreme court where i know there are justices who know that the chevron doctrine needs to be reconsidered because it is an abandonment of the responsibility and the power of the judicial branch of our government to cede this kind of power, this kind of authority to the bureaucracy. it's wrong, it needs to be overturned, and i urge my colleagues to vote to do so tonight. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.
does the gentleman have a motion -- the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. does the gentleman have a motion? mr. goodlatte: i move that the committee do now rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises.
the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 4768 and has come to no esolution thereon. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess for a period of less than 15 minutes.
policing? mr. earnest: as you know, there's an ongoing department of justice investigation into the situation in baton rouge. federal investigators are -- it is their standard practice to gather as much information as possible, including video evidence about what may have transpired, that's their standard practice. i'm confident they're following that standard practice in this this instance. for an update on the investigation, you have to ask the department of justice about hat. there's a well-established independent body in minnesota that's investigating, the department of justice is keeping tabs on it as well but the investigation is being led by the state. because of the ongoing investigation, i can't speak in a lot of detail about them. >> i want to ask you about george w. bush's inclusion in
the memorial. we know he was invited by the mayor. does the white house or the president see any role for the former president in tackling these issues? mr. earnest: obviously former president bush and mrs. bush are residents of dallas and they're prominent members of the dallas community. they were prominent members of that community well before he served in the white house. he obviously has got his own personal connection to the community that's grieving. i think for that reason it's entirely appropriate and i think even the -- a credit to him, that he has chosen to speak in this setting. i think it also serves as a valuable reminder that despite the well chronicled political differences between president the and president obama,
two of them are coming together at this time. i do think it underscores something that the president said over the weekend, that our country is not as divided as it might seem. and we have differences. and we articulate those differences and litigate those differences in a very vigorous fashion. when it comes to basic values about the courage and service of police officers and a commitment to the rule of law and justice, there's a lot of common ground to be found. even between two leaders that have differing political views. but on these issues, there's plenty of common ground to be found. >> we know that nancy pelosi is traveling down on air force one. has the white house extended an invitation to the republican leadership in congress to travel
down as well? mr. earnest: i know a number of invitations to congressional leaders to travel on air force one to dallas, i don't have a list to walk through with you. i know that a number of members of congress are still making travel plans. so we'll have more details about who will accompany the president to dallas tomorrow. >> the thought prosoose, i know he spent the majority of the day today is he doing the first draft? can you give us more behind the scenes who is calling on? who he is asking for help in writing the speech? is he making calls outside of the building or one of the speech writers? mr. earnest: the president does have a team of speech writers here at the white house with whom he's been table collaborate effectively on previous speeches of this sort. i think it should be evident to those of you closely watching the president's comments over the last four or five days here that he's got his own, deeply rooted personal feelings on this topic.
dent does have a very good sense of what he wants to say. and he'll be supported by a team of speech writers that will help im put that down on paper. that said, i don't want to how stimate or down play difficult it is for the president to appear in a setting like this. the president would tell you that he wished that he weren't alled on so often. to give these kinds of speeches. comforting those who are the surviving family members of the victims of gun violence.
we've seen a lot of that lately. too much of it in the president's mind. and -- but the president understands that this is what the president of the united states is called on to do. and the president embraces that responsibility, takes it quite seriously. and i think will be up to the task when he speaks tomorrow. >> he's obviously done a number of these newtown, charleston, fort hood twice, what is different about the process preparing for a speech like this -- >> we'll break away here and take you back live to the house floor for a series of votes, live coverage here on c-span. rd. yeas and nays. and h.r. 5606 by the yeas and
nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5602 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 560 a bill to amend title 31 united states code to authorize the secretary of the treasury to include all funds when issuing certain orders and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly
reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the the man from -- the -- unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. fitzpatrick, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5607 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5607, a bill to enhance the department of the treasury's role in protecting national security and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]