Congressman Jason Smith (R-MO):

“Across southeast and southern Missouri, job creators tell me that complying with costly, burdensome regulations keeps them from hiring more folks and expanding,” said Congressman Smith. “Washington’s excessive meddling in rural America hurts economic growth and job creation. My mission with the SCRUB Act is to require a full evaluation of all 175,000-plus pages of the Federal Register and identify outdated and ineffective regulations for removal. This streamlining will lessen regulatory burdens on small businesses and give them the freedom to innovate and grow.”

The SCRUB Act would establish a bipartisan, blue ribbon commission to retroactively review the existing federal regulations and determine which are no longer necessary or useful. According to the Small Business Administration, small businesses spend an average of $10,585 per employee each year to comply with federal regulations. This costs Americans $2.028 trillion in lost economic growth each year, according to the National Association of Manufacturers. The expenses are not borne by businesses alone; the Competitive Enterprise Institute found that for each household in America the price tag of regulation is more than $15,000. “It’s time for action to reduce these costs on job creators and American families,” said Congressman Smith.

“I’m introducing this bill because I see how these regulations affect families across Missouri and across the United States,” Congressman Smith said. “The EPA has issued regulations on wood burning stoves and is looking at regulating potentially every drop of water on private property. The Department of Labor thinks they know better than we do about our kids helping out on farms, and even school lunches have come under the jurisdiction of the federal government. It’s time for some common sense reforms.” (Press Release)

"[The] legislation is necessary to reduce the regulatory burden on individuals and businesses across the United States and avoid unnecessarily stifling economic growth. While experts and interested parties have suggested varying potential solutions for problems associated with regulatory accumulation, a reoccurring theme is the need for an independent regulatory commission," (H.Rept.115-14)

Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD)

This bill would establish an un-elected, nine-member commission to review existing federal rules and regulations and identify those they determine should be repealed on the faulty premises that regulations have an adverse impact on economic growth, job creation, and innovation.  In fact, H.R. 998 would make it easier to roll back existing regulations and make it harder for every department and agency in the federal government to issue new ones.  The unelected commission would have the power to issue subpoenas “requiring the attendance and testimony of witnesses and the production of any evidence relating to the duties of the commission.”  This broad, unspecified authority will give an unelected panel more power than Inspectors General, while having no oversight or accountability, all at the expense of taxpayers.

In addition, Members of Congress would be unable to debate and vote on each rule recommended for immediate repeal by the committee, and instead would be forced to vote on rule repeals as a package.  Any recommended repeal that is approved by Congress would result in the specified agency having to rescind the covered rules within sixty days.  H.R. 998 would essentially take the power away from elected representatives and Members of Congress, and give the power to an unelected appointed panel.

Further, H.R. 998 would create a “regulatory cut-go” procedure not dependent on congressional approval that would require any agency issuing a new regulation to repeal an existing regulation of greater or equal value within its jurisdiction that the commission has determined should be abolished.  Under “regulatory cut-go,” all regulations recommended by the Commission for repeal would be placed into an inventory of regulations which the agencies would be required to repeal over time through a “cut-go” process as agencies promulgate new regulations.  The costs of each new agency regulation must be offset by cost-reductions associated with the repeal of regulations in the inventory of regulations, until each agency completes the repeals of its own regulations specified in the inventory.  Simply put, no federal agency could issue a new rule, however justified or in the public’s immediate interest, unless it cut an existing one that imposes equal “costs” on the economy

This bill would give enormous power to an appointed committee with virtually no oversight or regulations, while tying the hands of agencies that are knowledgeable and have extensive experience in particular areas.  It would put the American people at risk, while wasting their tax dollars.