the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 240. the nays are 167. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from florida, mr. miller, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 675, as amended, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 155, h.r. 657, a bill to increase effective as of december 1, 2015, the race of compensation for veterans and service-connected disabilities and the rates of dependency and indemnity compensation for the survivors of certain disabled veterans 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.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 409. the nayare zero. 2/3 havingesponded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection, the title is amended.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, t house is not in order. the speakepro tempore: the house wl be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. goodlatte: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and

inclu extraneous materials on h.r. 427. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 38 1990 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the considation of h.r. 427. the chair appoints the gentleman from texas, mr. marchant, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 427 which the clerk will now report the title. the clerk: a bill to amend chapter 8 of title 5, united states code, to provide th major rules of the execute branch shall have no force or effect unless a joint resolution of approval is enacted into law.

the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte and the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. goodlatte. mr. goodlatte: mr. chairman, the committee is not in order. the chair: the house will be in order. members, take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman can proceed. mr. goodlatte: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: so ordered. mr. goodlatte: regulatory reform plays a critical role in ensuring that our nation finally achieves a full economic recovery and retains its competitive edge in the global marketplace. congress must advance

pro-growth policies that restores economic prosperity for families and businesses across the nation and makes sure that the administration and its regulatory apparatus is held accountable to the american people. america's small business owners are suffering under mountains of endlessly growing bureaucratic red tape, and the uncertainty about the cost of upcoming regulations discourages employers from hiring new employees and expanding their businesses. excessive regulation means higher prices, lower wages, fewer jobs, less economic growth and a less competitive america. today, americans face a burden of over $3 trillion from federal taxation and regulation. in fact, our federal regulatory burden is larger than the 2014 gross domestic product of all but the top nine countries in the world. that burden adds up to $15,000 per american household.

nearly 30% of average household income in 2014. everyone knows it has been this way for far too long, but the obama administration, instead of fixing the problem, knows only one response, increase taxes, increase spending, increase regulation. the results have painfully demonstrated a simple truth, america cannot tax, spend and regulate its way to economic recovery economic growth and durable prosperity for the american people. consider just a few facts that reveal the economic weakness the obama administration has produced. in the june, 2015, jobs report the number of unemployed workers, workers who can only find part-time jobs and workers who are now only marginally attached to the labor force, stood at 10.8%. they number over 16 million americans. america's labor force participation rate remains at lows not seen since the carter

administration, and median household income still is below the level achieved before the financial crisis. . the contrast between america's current condition and the recovery president reagan achieved is stark. 4 1/2 years after the recession began in 1981, the reagan administration through policies opposite to the obama administration created 7.8 million more jobs than when the recession began. real per capita gross domestic product rose by $3,091. real immediate i don't know household income rose by 7.7%. to check america's problems, the reins act is one of the clearest and most powerful measures we can adopt. the regulation that the obama administration issued and plans to issue is without modern

precedent. testimony before the judiciary committee during recent congresses has shown the connection between skyrocketing levels of regulation and declining levels of jobs and growth sm the reins act responds by requiring an up or down vote by the people's representatives in congress before any new regulation defined in the bill generally as a rule that has an effect on the economy of at least $100 million, can be imposed on our economy. it does not prohibit new major regulation. it simply establishes the principle, no major regulation without representation. by requiring congress, which is more directly accountable to the american people, to approve or deny major regulations proposed by the administration, the reins act provides congress and ultimately the people with a much needed tool to check the

one-way cost ratchet that washington's regulatory bureaucrats to often turn. during the 113th and 112th congress, the reins act was passed multiple times, each time on a bipartisan vote. i thank mr. young of indiana for introducing this legislation and urge all of my colleagues to vote for the rarnse act and i reserve -- reins act and i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: i rise in opposition to h.r. 427. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. johnson: h.r. 427 the regulations from the executive in need of scrutiny act of 2015, known as the reins act, would amend the congressional review act to require that both houses of congress pass and the president sign a joint resolution of approval within 70

legislative days before any major rule issued by an agency can take effect. additionally, h.r. 27 imposes deadlines -- 427 imposes deadlines approving a major rule could be referred to as byzanntine. the house may only consider a major rule on the second and fourth thursday of each month. last year, there were 13 of such days on the legislative calendar compared to the 80 major rules adopted in 2014. furthermore, under new section 801, congress may only consider such resolutions which -- within 70 legislative days of receiving a major rule. this process would constructively end rulemaking as

we know it. now, mr. speaker the reason why the -- my friends on the other side of the aisle contend that we need this kind of gumming the works legislation, which would result in the passage of no new regulations, the reason that they give is because these new regulations are stifling economic growth and they point to the obama administration and say that it is because of regulations enacted or promulgated and placed into operation under the obama administration that has caused our economy to be at a point where they're saying, we're not as economically vital as it should be. what they're failing to tell the american people is that it was the gush republican economic

policies -- the george bush republican economic policies of the first part of this century that led to the great recession the economic meltdown, the fact that there were not regulations that prohibited predatory lending and other economic policies which contributed to the economic meltdown, they won't tell you it was because of the lack of regulation that caused that. but indeed, if you go back and talk to alan greenspan, who chaired the federal reserve and was a big anti-regulatory capitalist, he had to come back after the great recession and admit that he was wrong and his policies were those that contributed to the economic meltdown, which despite horrendous opposition from the

opposite side of the aisle against the policies of democrats and president obama they tried to obstruct thosehey were enacted. and as a result, america's economic recovery has been quite notable. corporate profits are up, even though productivity is up and wages are steady. workers have not participated in the upswing in this election, even though jobs have been created for the last 65 straight months under the obama administration. but the wage growth has been stagnant and it's because of the trickle-down republican policies that have caused this. and now they want to blame the lack of money in the pocket books of americans monies in

the pockets of americans working people they want to blame that on regulations. even if agencies reduce the number of major rules in contemplation of the bill's onerous requirements, congress would still lack the expertise and policy justifications for refusing to adopt a major rule. 80 leading professors on environmental and administrative law have noted in a letter to the judiciary committee earlier this year, without this expertise any disapproval is likely or therefore -- excuse me any disapproval is therefore more likely to reflect the political power of special interests. a potential that would be magnified in light of the fast track process. lastly, by upending the process for agency rulemaking so congress can simply void major

rules through inaction, the reins act likely violates the requirements of article 1 of the constitution as professor ron levin, a leading expert on administrative law noteded during the hearing on the reins act last congress. quote, the reality is that the act is intended to enable a single house of congress to control the implementation of the laws through the rulemaking process, such a scheme transgresses the very idea of separation of powers under which the constitution entrusts the writing of the laws to the legislative branch and the implementation of the laws to the executive branch. indeed as the supreme court noted in the landmark case, i.n.s. versus shada, the constitution does not contemplate an active role of congress in the supervision of officers charged with the

execution of laws it enacts. the court also clarified that it was, quote profound conviction of the framers that the powers conferred on congress were the powers to be most carefully circumscribed by providing that no law could take effect without the concurrence of the prescribed majority of the members of both houses the framers re-emphasized their belief that legislation should not be enacted unless it has been carefully and fully considered by the nation's elected officials, end quote. it defies crudulity that so many of my republican colleagues who oppose crony capitalism and hold the framers' inat the present time they would support it which is a bold attempt by corporations and special

interests to shield themselves from any oversight and in the process shred article 1 of the constitution. furthermore, speaker boehner has also said that the republican-led do-nothing congress the most ineffective in modern history, and i'll note we are getting ready to adjourn tomorrow, a day early, for a six-week adjournment with all of the work that remains for congress to do. but speaker boehner also said that the republican-led do-nothing congress, the most ineffective the in modern history should be judged by the number of laws it repeals, not the number of laws that it passes. it therefore follows that this obstruction -- obstruct at any cost approach would carry over to blocking the most critical agency rulemaking, thereby

protecting americans' health safety well-being and economic growth. who stands to gain from republican obstructionism? corporate gipets that are holding our country hostage through a deregulatory agenda and political influence that would rival the industry monopolies from the past century. unsurprisingly many of the same corporations are continuing to show record profit margins that are pushing deregulation and fewer taxes because they have an obsession with short-term profits at the expense of long-term value creation, according to the c.e.o. of "business insider." unquestionably h.r. 27 would be nothing short of a catastrophic event for every day americans who stand to lose from the mistreatment of our nation's

regulatory system. mr. speaker, we need real solutions to help real people, not yet another thinly valed handout to large corporations, not another messaging bill to take back to the district over the august recess. we need legislation that creates middle class security and opportunity and we need sensible regulations that protect american families from financial ruin that encourage competition that brings predatory financial practices to an end. legislation that brings the united states into conformity with the rest of the developed world's employment policies by guaranteeing paid sick and parental leave. legislation that increases our global competitiveness by creating an affordable higher education. legislation that increases the

minimum wage from a paltry $7.25 an hour. i urge my colleagues to oppose h.r. 427, yet another deregulatory bill in the crony capitalist agenda. and with that, i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from georgia. mr. goodlatte: i ask unanimous consent that the exchange of letters between the judiciary committee and rules committee be included in the record. i have to agree with my friend from georgia and this administration's recovery has been amazing amazingly bad. with that, i yield two minutes to the majority whip mr. scalise from louisiana. the chair: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman from georgia for yielding. mr. chairman, if you look at what is happening in our economy, why the economy is

struggling so badly through this obama economy, it's because of radical regulations coming out of washington. every time i go home and meet with small businesses in southeast louisiana, the common thread is that it's not the local business down the street that's the main threat to their business. the main threat to small businesses throughout my district and i hear it from my colleagues, are the thousands and thousands of pages that come out of these federal agencies, these radical regulations that come out of these federal agencies unelected bureaucrats that are imposing, in essence, new law, making it harder to create jobs in this country. taxpayers deserve a federal government that's more efficient, more effective and more accountable and that's what the reins act does. the reins act forces real accountability in regulations that are coming out of washington whether it's the i.r.s. or e.p.a. or nlrb or

h.h.s. or c.m.f., the alphabet soup of federal agencies that is crippling our economy with all of these regulations is what is holding our economy back and why not have a mechanism that says if a rule is being proposed by a federal agency, by an unelected bureaucrat that is so important that's going to have a major impact on our economy, shouldn't it go through the transparency of coming before the elected representatives of the people, mr. chairman? why not have these conversations on c-span, not in the dark halls of an agency and a bureaucrat said they are going to create a new law that is going to devastate our economy? shouldn't it go through public hearings and go through elected members of congress who are held accountable. let's stop crippling our economy and holding our economy back

with these regulations. let's pass the reins act and bring real accountability into the process of creating regulations in washington. i yield the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: i recognize the gentleman from virginia for four minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in opposition of the bill. the reins act would add obstacles to the regulations designed to protect american workers' health and safety and to protect the environment. it would jeopardize the economy by impeding efforts to address growing inequality and prevent discrimination. congress already has the right to disapprove any rule through the congressional review act or through appropriations bills or other legislation. this bill would essentially impose a procedural choke hold

by requiring that any -- choke hold by requiring that any major rule to have approval within 70 legislative days. as an example of the effect of this bill, we note that occupational safety and health administration osha, is in the process of updating a nearly 70-year-old standard to keep workers from contracting a progressive and frequently fatal lung disease called chronic barillium disease. in the 1940's, workers at the atomic energy plants were contracting acute poisoning. to deal with the problem, two of their scientists sitting in the back of a taxi cab on the way to the meeting established back in 1948, that standard is still in place today. it is often called the taxi cab standard because there was no data supporting that number.

in 1975, the national institute for occupational safety and health advised osha to issue a new more stringent protective standard. that effort faltered. now, one cost of inaction is estimated loss of 100 lives per year each year this new standard is delayed. another is the fact that we have to pay over $300 million in federal compensation to workers and their survivors who have contracted this disease and employed by the energy department's contractors and vendors. today over 100,000 workers are exposed to about a rill yum and -- barillium. the substantial stakeholders' support for producers and labor representatives to cut the standard exposure limit by 90%. over the last 17 years osha has worked to update that standard based on numerous

scientific studies and expert recommendations. and now the new standard is working its way slowly through the regulatory process and under the present laws and procedures it still might be another year or two before the rule is promulgated. so despite scientific evidence, there are still a few who object and by requiring a bicameral resolution of approval prior to the rule ever taking effect, this legislation will make it easier for well-funded special interest groups to block needed workplace protections. so the underlying bill does nothing but prioritize special interests above the protection of lives and limbs of american workers. i therefore urge a no vote on this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate it. i am pleased to yield five minutes to the gentleman from indiana, mr. young, the author of this piece of legislation.

the chair: mr. young is recognized for five minutes. mr. young: well, i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i'd also like to thank the leader and chairman goodlatte for bringing h.r. 427 to the floor today. i introduced the reins act because people in my home state of indiana want to hold someone, someone accountable for the job-killing rules and regulations coming out of washington, d.c. each day government agencies impose an average of 10 new regulations on america's businesses both big and small. so it's no surprise to discover that the costly, confusing government regulations that come out of this body -- obamacare mandates, e.p.a. regulations or i.r.s. tax penalties are getting feedback from my constituents. in fact, the collateral damage brought by federal regulations is consistently cited as one of the biggest barriers to business creation and expansion

and growth in household income in this country. one indiana business owner, who employs 16 family men and women in floyd county, recently called my office. he wanted to know who had voted in support of a peculiar new i.r.s. rule that's going to penalize him if he helps his employees pay for health insurance. now, thirst rule can cost employers more than $36,000 per employee per year if they continue to offend the sensibilities of washington's regulating class by reimbursing workers for health care coverage. as a son of a small business owner and someone who hears a lot of local businesses back in indiana, about their challenges about their opportunities, i know how costly regulations impact a small company's bottom line. and while this broad new i.r.s. rule will undoubtedly have a huge impact on smaller enterprises across the nation

it was written by unelected, unaccountable regulators here in washeds. never came before congress -- in washington, d.c. never came before congress for an up or down vote, and that's what the reins act is all about. it's about holding federal officials at federal agencies and the congress of the united states accountable for the harmful regulations drummed up each year. regulations which are laws in everything but name. they hurt american jobs and wages when they're implemented and they need an additional filter of accountability here in the people's house. who should be held responsible, i would ask opponents of this legislation, for these rules that have $100 million-plus impact on our economy? if not the people's elected representatives in congress. for too long, congress has delegated much of its constitutional authority to executive agencies here in washington, d.c. this is empowered unelected federal officials to implement

sweeping rules and regulations that are often ineffective redundant, counterproductivey. consider the impact of such rules on another business in my home district in indiana. it's a local farming operation. when we add up the impact of county, state and federal regulations, these hoosier farmers must meet hundreds of reporting requirements dictated by an alphabet soup of different government agencies. e.p.a., usda h.h.s., i.r.s., nlrb. it goes on and on and on. it's mind-numbing really. the burden on their operation and its ability to grow and compete has been punishing. for example, one regulation alone requires them to treat water left over from cracking eggs it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars each year for this bill in consulting and equipment fees just in compliance costs. and now with the e.p.a. assuming broad new authority

over bodies of water in the united states, these farmers are taking more time and resources away from their farm to track these ill-defined regulations coming down the pike. now, america's job creators will tell you the future is uncertain. our rulemaking process is out of the people's control. it needs to be reined in. wouldn't it make since for small business owners to have larger voice, to be given a bigger say in the rulemaking process, especially when regulations can dictate whether their business succeeds or fails? that's exactly what my legislation, the reins act, provides. it gives the job creators and the american people a voice. it injects a measure of accountability back into the democratic process. and the reins act requires that congress must approve any new major rule proposed by the executive branch before it can be enforced on the american people. remember, our small businesses are our nation's economic

engine. they represent 99.7% of all national employers. 56.1 million of our nation's private work force. small and family-owned businesses, new startups and entrepreneurs create 2/3 of all job growth in the united states. meanwhile, small businesses spend an estimated $10,500 per employee to comply with federal regulations. it's no wonder that for the first time in 35 years more american companies are being destroyed than they are being created each year. the chair: the gentleman will suspend for a moment. mr. collins: the gentleman is extended another minute. mr. young: it leads to higher consumer costs take-home pay a business owner who owns a parts manufacturing company summed it up best. from his standpoint, when it comes to the vast array of

rules and regulations the company must follow, they add zero to his business and puts them at a disadvantage to foreign competition. the challenges with our federal regulation system, we could frankly spend a lot more time than today here on the floor going through each of the different challenges. but in the end, congress needs to be forced to account for the regulations resulting from or sweeping legislation like obamacare and dodd-frank. the reins act accomplishes this objective. the reins act, like the hoosiers i represent, demands krblet. i thank the chairman. -- demands consideration. i thank the chairman. i yield the floor. the chair: the gentleman from georgia reserves his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you. i often hear my colleagues on

the other side of the aisle repeat false information, and it's unfortunate that it would be perpetrated that economic growth has been hurt because of a -- an explosion of regulations during the obama administration. and i'll be the first to admit with the historic passage of the affordable care act which has enabled 16 million americans to now have access to the health care system 16 million people. could have been more if the policies had not been obstructed so much, if we hadn't had 50-plus votes to do

away with the affordable care act we'd have more people having access to the health care system in this country. but bringing that many people into the health care system and actually changing the health care system required new regulations, and so people had been trying for 75 to 100 years to establish health care for everyone in this country. the affordable care act was the closest that we could come to that idea, but it was a transformational bill and it did require new regulations to nurture it and to get it to this point, which has been a complete success despite all opposition. and then the dodd-frank legislation that was passed as a result of the great recession , which was caused by a lack of regulation. so we had regulations that had

to come forth as a result of the passage of that legislation to protect the health, safety and well-being, financial well-being of everyday americans. and so with that act having passed and controls put on excessive speculation in the financial services industry we've seen economic growth and that is the bottom line. 64 straight months of private sector job growth. that's 12.8 million private sector jobs created amidst a regulatory system that is pro-worker pro-environment pro-health and safety and pro-innovation. that's a significant accomplishment, and with that i will reserve the balance of my time. .

mr. collins: i appreciate that. it's now my privilege to yield two minutes to the chairman of the small business a fighter for small businesses and families that they represent, mr. chabot from ohio. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chabot: before i get into my prepared remarks, i have to respond to my good friend from georgia's comments about the affordable care act, which many have referred to as obamacare as most people over to it. there's certainly was a need to help some of those folks who didn't have insurance and there were ways of doing that, but bypassage of this legislation we've adversely negatively impacted far more americans than we've helped. we have seen americans' rates go up, deductibles go up and premiums go up and getting less quality health care for that.

it's been a disaster for many americans and a lieutenant of it is still unfolding and then on dodd-frank which the gentleman mentioned, what we have seen as a result of that, and i happen to be the chair of the small business committee, small businesses, one of their greatest challenges is getting access to capital so they can grow or start a business or grow an existing business and create more jobs. because of dodd-frank, we got a whole new army of bureaucrats looking over the shoulders of banks and the smaller banks too, like community banks who had nothing to do with this so-called economic meltdown and credit unions, bureaucrats making it tougher for them to make loans to small businesses. those two pieces of legislation which many of my friends on the other side of the aisle have been disastrous for this country. getting to this particular piece of legislation, half of america is employed by small businesses and in fact, 70% of the new jobs

created in this economy are created by small businesses. and families rely on small businesses to put food on the table and roof over their heads. they're very critical to the american community and economy. there is not a small business owner i know who thinks that the government creates jobs, but they do know that government can keep them from creating jobs and it does with one size fits all regulations and does by perpetrating increasing uncertainty. would the gentleman have an additional minute available? i thank the gentleman. and the ranlse act forces government to think before it acts. it protects the american people by ensuring that those that they elected get a say in major regulations, not all regulations, just regulations that would have a significant

impact on the economy. now some may falsely claim that this bill is about deregulation. it's not. it's about accountability. it's about making government think before it acts and if it chooses to act the american people can hold their elected representatives, us, for making that decision, not some nameless faceless bureaucracy. but their elected representatives. that's what this is all about. this is commonsense legislation and i commend the gentleman from indiana for offering this and i thank the gentleman from georgia for handling this on the floor today. the reince act is a good piece of legislation and i urge my colleagues to support it. mr. collins: i appreciate the good words there from the the gentleman from georgia. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: how much time remains on both sides? the chair: mr. johnson, you have 13 minutes and mr. collins 14.

mr. johnson: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. mr. collins. mr. collins: at this time, i'm privileged to give two minutes to the gentleman from texas, another fighter for his district and those who are affected by regulation mr. farenthold from texas. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. farenthold: the constitution vests all legislative powers in congress. unfortunately past members of this institution have given a lot of the power to government agencies like the e.p.a. or the department of health and human services or another alphabet soup of agencies. and under president obama, he's using his pen and his telephone to talk to the idealogs who work in and run these agencies to change laws, to make laws without coming to congress. unelected -- faceless federal bureaucrats are making legislation that have the force of law not elected representatives of the people. there are reams of rules. there are so many rules out

there, i bet the average person can't go a couple of hours without violating a rule or regulation they probably don't even know about. the reins act is a first step in bringing in these job-killing legislation. thep reins act brings accountability back to the system. when a regulation with an economic impact of more than $100 million comes out of one of these agencies, it has to be approved by congress. that's our job. the constitution says so. the people who elected us to make laws and the people who will hold us accountable for those laws if they are bad laws. how do you hold a faceless federal bureaucrat accountable? we have seen through the v.a. it is practically impossible to fire one of these bureaucrats but every two years you can fire somebody in this house and every years you have the opportunity to fire someone on the other side. let congress do the job the founding fathers intended.

put the people's representative back in charge. follow the constitution. you know the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson made a great point when he was reading through the constitution or the supreme court decision talking about the constitutional responsibility of this branch of government to make the laws. that's what the reins act does. it gives us the power back. another gentleman on the other side spoke about the taxi cab standard and how this random regulation has been law for years. well, if the reins act had been in effect, that would have come before congress and we could have asked the question, where's the science behind that? it would have worked then and it will work when we pass it now. i yield back. mr. collins: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia. mr. johnson: i will reserve. the chair: the gentleman from

georgia reserves. the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: i recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. rothfus for three minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rothfus: i rise in strong support of the reins act. congress has allowed unelected federal bureaucrats to do the policy making. these unaccounted individuals affect the daily lives with little regard to the impact. we learned a month ago in a supreme court decision, the e.p.a. failed to appropriately consider the cost and benefits of its mass proposal which is estimated to cost $9 billion with a benefit of only $ million to $6 million. solid middle-class jobs in my district are being regulated right out of existence. consider that in 2015, thus far more than 150 regulations have

been finalized with total costs exceeding $60 billion and 10 million hours of paperwork. it is this culture that hinders the job creation and economic growth we need in cities and towns across america that will provide for americans to get back in the game and get america back on track. there's a bigger issue here and that is what is represented in this bill. it goes to the constitutional structure of our government where we are supposed to have an executive branch that enforces the law and legislative branch that makes the law and judicial branch that adjudicates the law. this body has ceded responsibilities to the executive branch. this is a start to restoring the proper structure of government and accountability. when regulations are passed that people don't agree with, there is no way to hold the regulators accountable. if congress had a say you could hold congress accountable. this is what self-government is

all about. i reflect on 34 years ago when a certain gentleman spoke on the west front of this capitol and had these words to say. from time to time, we have been attempted to believe that society is too complex, that government by an elite group for, by and of the people. if no one among us is capable governing amongst ourselves who has the capacity to govern someone else. i thank the committee for its work on the ranlse act and i urge support to restore the proper constitutional structure of who's responsible for the laws that come out of this town. you would think that members of congress would want to take credit for good regulations and protect people from bad regulations. again that's what this legislation does. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. the economic elites who are the

patrons of many of my friends across the aisle believe in trickle-down economics which george herbert walker bush termed to be voodoo economics. my friends believe when you put a quarter in the pocket of a rich man, then there's a hole in that pocket and it trickles down -- the quarter falls out into nickels and dimes and distributed to the waiting folks -- the waiting working class people of the country. they believe that that's how the economy works. give the rich the money and let them operate in an unregulated environment and then somehow magicically the economy trickles down to those waiting at the

bottom of the scale, waiting for some kind of a handout. and that's not how our economy works. it works from the ground up. and it works with people going to work making a decent wage delivering services for a period of time, 40 hours a week, that's a regulation we didn't used to have those. there are times when people were poor, predominantly and the nation was poor as a result, but due to these regulations like the minimum wage, the 0-hour work week, the health and safety regulations on the job. we were able to build a middle class in this country that sustained us up until the time when ronald reagan won the presidency and established the

current climate of trickle-down economics and we have seen during that time that what is happened, the rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer. the middle class has been squeezed so there is not as many working middle class people as there were once before. and so this reins act is a gift to the economic elites, who have had their way with the economy for the last 40 years. they want to stab the heart of the american economy now bypassing this act, the reins act, which would not deregulate but stop all future regulations. and that's something that america does not need.

and so i'm going to urge my colleagues at the appropriate time to oppose this legislation. and oppose voo do economics, oppose trickle-down economics and with that, i would reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. goodlatte: i yield myself 30 seconds to just say that the fact of the matter is, we aren't talking about voodoo economics but representative democracy. the american people elect their representatives from 435 congressional districts 50 states select their senators and send us to washington, d.c., to write the laws of the land. the laws that the gentleman referred to were all written by the united states congress signed into law by various presidents. then those laws are turned into regulations and that's where there is no more representative democracy. the bureaucracy that writes the regulations has no

accountability. they write regulations that cost too much that strangle the job creation that both the gentleman from georgia and i would like to see greater job creation and more jobs for the middle class. i yield myself an additional 15 seconds. so this bill is about restoring representative democracy to the american people in fairness to the american people in protecting their economy and protecting their jobs by making sure that bureaucrats are held accountable and send those regulations back to the congress for an up or down vote that yes those regulations comport with what the congress intended when they wrote the floor. if they comport, they take effect, if they don't, they don't take effect. it's my pleasure to yield three minutes to the gentleman from west virginia, mr. jenkins.