Volume 160, No. 42 covering the 2nd Session of the 113th Congress (2013 - 2014) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“REDUCING REGULATORY BURDEN” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H2428-H2431 on March 13, 2014.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
REDUCING REGULATORY BURDEN
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of January 3, 2013, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford) for 30 minutes.
Mr. LANKFORD. Mr. Speaker, it is amazing when we get a chance to be able to talk about something simple: Can a company run its own business? That seems like a very straightforward statement. Of course a company can run its own business. But it is fascinating to me when we begin to go down the process of how many regulations and how many things a company has to do to fulfill Federal mandates, and it begs one simple question: Is Washington the boss of every company in America? Is Washington the boss of every family in America? Quite frankly, is Washington the boss of every employee in America? We don't work for ourselves anymore unless we are given permission by the Federal Government.
Now lest someone think I may be carrying this overboard, tonight we want to have a little conversation on what is happening in our Nation right now, when we have a Nation that is so focused on how we can wrap around every business to decide what is best for the employees, what is best for the employer, and what is best for everyone around them.
There are several Members here as well, and I want to yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin), who has been an amazing Member of this House of Representatives in the work he has done, and he comes with this small business perspective. He knows how to grow a business. He grew a small business to a very large business that was very significant, even through all of the regulatory process.
I yield to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Mullin).
Mr. MULLIN. I thank Mr. James Lankford from Oklahoma. What a wonderful colleague you are. You are absolutely correct, and the only reason I stand in front of you today is truly the biggest threat I had as a business owner, from a gentleman who literally had the opportunity to have a very small company and see how the Lord can bless it and take it until now we employ over 120 people across the State of Oklahoma, when I woke up one day and realized that the biggest threat I have to my company is the Federal Government, that is a sad reality.
You are absolutely correct. It is ridiculous to sit and think we have to ask Washington, D.C., for permission to be able to hire. They literally regulate who we can hire and how we can fire them. We don't ever want to fire an employee, but the truth is sometimes you have to move on. The relationship doesn't work, and yet you are told how you have to do that.
As a business owner, we want to hire the best people and keep the best people. That is how we grow the company. But at the end of day when we have to constantly ask permission how we do our job, can we do our job this way, are we allowed to grow the company, are we allowed to complete it, what agencies do we have to go through just to get a permit to do something that needs to be accomplished, it gets out of hand. We woke up one day and we realized we were spending 40 cents out of every dollar that comes into our company to simply comply with a mandate or a regulation coming down from the government. Forty cents out of every dollar.
I was questioned one time on an interview. They said, How is that possible? Aren't you including taxes?
I said: No, this doesn't include taxes.
The person said I don't believe what you are saying, and I challenge you.
I told them, just walk the halls with me in my office, and you will go past a compliance office, you will go past a payroll department, which is strongly regulated. You will go by an H.R. department that is strongly regulated, and so on and so on. I said you will be shocked how much we spend on payroll just to meet those certain mandates and those regulations.
It is literally laughable when you have people up here in Washington, D.C., get up and say they got a job package. If they were really that good at creating jobs, why didn't they do it before they got here? The truth is they don't know because if they did, the only thing they would have to do is start reining in the regulations. At the end of the day, is America the land of opportunity because right now if Washington, D.C., if the Federal Government continues to overregulate, the opportunities and the entrepreneurial spirit that exists in America is no longer going to exist.
I would like to thank the gentleman for bringing this to our attention and taking the time and your time to say hey, enough is enough.
Mr. LANKFORD. I thank the gentleman.
As the husband of an amazing lady and a dad of two amazing two young daughters, I enjoyed the previous Special Order that happened here about Women's History Month. I, as a dad, want to see my daughters be able to succeed and have every single opportunity of every single other American, and so I would like to yield to my colleague from New York so she is able to enter some things into the Record.
Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. I thank the gentleman for his beautiful words. Certainly the museum will not be achieved without like-minded men who support it.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include for the Record an op-
ed that Marsha Blackburn and I wrote called ``The Women You Don't Know Yet,'' and a beautiful, beautiful op-ed written by Renee Ellmers representing the great State of North Carolina called ``A National Museum For Women's History.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. LANKFORD. I want to continue on this ongoing conversation. How do decisions get made in America?
It is the assumption again that if you are a landowner or a farmer and rancher, you look around your farm and you look for what is best for your land and for your family, as well as for the families around you. No one takes better care of the land than farmers and ranchers all across America.
But it is interesting, as you go across western Oklahoma, you will drive for miles and you will see barbwire fences. At the bottom of it, they will have a small, little ribbon all the way across it. People from outside the State might wonder what that is, but landowners know what it is. That is the Fish and Wildlife Service has stepped onto their private property and said that if you are going to have a fence there in that spot, you have to mark the bottom wire in case a lesser prairie chicken were to be in your area.
So hundreds of miles of fences have now been marked. People have been hired or families have spent their precious time, instead of farming or ranching, instead tagging barbwire in case there is a lesser prairie chicken somewhere in the area, which I remind you, is not an endangered species. It is a species that is being discussed to possibly be threatened at some future point, but it is not listed as threatened. It is not listed as endangered. But millions of dollars have been spent on things like tagging barbwire fences and limiting roads.
{time} 2100
Now, landowners have to go to the Fish and Wildlife Service and ask permission for how many head of cattle that they can have in a certain area, in case a lesser prairie chicken happens to be in the area.
It is an interesting day that we have in America, that whether you are farming, ranching, running a plumbing company, or whether you are a contractor, it seems that Washington is the boss of us, and we make decisions based on that.
I would like to be able to welcome in a colleague of mine from my same class, who has been a leader not only in his State legislature, but is now a leader here in this legislature, Mr. Alan Nunnelee. I would like to be able to invite him to be able to come and continue on this conversation.
Mr. NUNNELEE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend from Oklahoma for his leadership in bringing focus to this important issue.
The foundation for our country rests on the shoulders of ``we the people.'' Under our constitutional form of government, we the people are the boss, and Washington is the servant.
Unfortunately, under this current administration, there is not a week that goes by without more evidence of out-of-control bureaucracies attempting to run local businesses through unnecessary rules and regulations.
I could give many examples, but in the interest of time, I will just give one. Columbus Brick Company is located in Columbus, Mississippi. They have been making clay bricks since 1890. Mr. Al Puckett is the fourth generation of that family to run that business.
After they spent substantial sums much money to bring the factory into compliance with new Environmental Protection Agency regulations, the EPA is now threatening new, even more expensive regulations without any input from the public, from the stakeholders, from Congress, or from we the people.
Last June, Mr. Puckett appeared before the House Judiciary Committee. He testified:
If EPA uses the same approach that they have followed on recent rules, Columbus Brick may cease to exist after almost 125 years of operation. I expect a minimum of having to shut down 2 or 3 kilns. That will mean a permanent job loss of 45 to 50 families in our small rural community.
Sadly, Mr. Speaker, it gets worse. These EPA regulations do not result in any significant benefit to the environment. The brick industry in general--Columbus Brick Company in particular--is already operating well within safe levels. Unfortunately, Columbus Brick Company is not unique in the impact this rule would have on small businesses. Many would be forced to close their doors.
Only in Washington are rules handed down to businesses without allowing the affected parties the ability to weigh in before the settlement agreements are adopted. Environmental regulations should be fair, reasonable, and they should balance costs versus benefits.
This body understands this concept, and that is why, in February, we passed the ALERRT Act, which would require the administration to account for the cost of excessive regulations to minimize the impact on small businesses.
Mr. Puckett stated it best:
We are not asking for the rule to go away. We are asking that the practice of establishing unreasonable deadlines without input from the impacted industries go away.
Mr. Speaker, Mississippians know that the power and drive of America is in the individual, and the great solutions to the great challenges facing our country don't come in Washington, neither do they come in our State capitals. The challenges to our solutions can be found around our kitchen tables and our homes and our churches and our communities.
Unfortunately, it is the mentality that the government is the boss. It has been oppressive on companies like Columbus Brick, but their spirit of survival is what has allowed them to survive for several generations. Washington, and particularly not the EPA, is not the boss of Columbus Brick.
Mr. LANKFORD. I thank the gentleman for Mississippi for being here and being part of this conversation because this does affect every single corner of our Nation.
Everywhere we go, this tends to be the same issue repeated over and over again. How do individuals make decisions and not have to wait for the Federal Government to be able to give them permission to be able to do this?
We could go on and on, but let me just give you several other examples that some people may know well and some people may not know well.
If you are going to put in a traffic light, just a simple installation, maybe a day or two at an intersection, to be able to put in a traffic light at an intersection, somewhere in the vicinity of that, there will be a board that has been placed up by the company.
There will be 24 different posters stapled to that board to give instructions to anyone who happens to be at that job site installing a traffic light for a day or two of all of their rights under the Department of Labor rules--24 posters posted outside somewhere in the vicinity around where they are doing construction on a traffic light.
Does anyone think that is common sense? I would assume not; but yet it is all over the country. Every company that is installing traffic lights or working on roads or bridges or anywhere they may be, they are hauling around this giant board and putting it up because the Federal Government makes them do it. As they install it, they all think the same thing. Do I work for the government, or does the government work for me?
Many banks in America now, after the Dodd-Frank regulations were passed just 5 years ago, when those regulations were passed--or that law was passed and the regulations are now promulgated, banks will tell you, all over the country--small banks, family-owned banks in small rural communities, medium-sized banks, banks that had nothing to do with the meltdown that happened in our economy in 2008 and 2009--these community banks will tell you many of them have a regulator sitting there full time now.
If not full time, multiple times a year, for weeks on end, a government regulator comes and sits down at their bank and goes through every single piece of everything.
Many of these banks will tell you, if they call one of these regulators and say: Hey, I am thinking about making a loan, and I am considering this, I need to know, when you evaluate my bank, what are you going to say on this, many of the regulators will say: Well, I will evaluate it when I see it.
They won't give them proactive advice. They won't actually help them in advance, but they will show up at the end of it and be able to downgrade them if they made the wrong decision.
That is not a government that is designed to serve you. That is a government that we serve. Banks have suddenly become entities of the Federal Government, constantly worried about some Federal regulator coming in and what they may or may not do. Again, Washington is not our boss.
The overtime rules that were just proposed today by the President, it seems like a such a nice thing to do. If someone works overtime, they should get additional pay, but leaving out this simple fact: people all over America worked hourly and worked to get to a salaried position, so then they saw that as a promotion.
Suddenly, the President of the United States is stepping in and saying: I am going to actually demote you again and put you back on an hourly-type situation, that if you make a certain amount, you are going to have to count your hours.
Well, what really happens in real life with that? Well, I can tell you immediately after that rule gets promulgated, Pam Parks, who owns Blue Wave and Silver Wave Boats in Seminole, Oklahoma, contacts me immediately and says: Does the President have any idea what this would mean in real life in a real business?
I can tell Pam probably not because what it will mean in real life for her, what it will mean in real life for her employees, what it will mean in real life for companies all over America are multiple things, that when the President in Washington shows up at a business and says it is obvious you don't take care of your employees, so we are going to force you to do this, and we are going to take over your business, and we are going to run your payroll different than how you are running it, what really happens is salaried workers suddenly step back down to hourly workers, and someone who really wants to succeed and is going to put in the time to do that, the boss has to step in to them onsite and say: you can't work more than 40 hours. I know you wanted to be here and to do extra stuff and try to work your way up the ladder. No, you can't do that; because at a certain pay level, there is a cut off there, and you have to have extra overtime.
Now, someone who may make a little bit more, they can stay extra, they can work their way up the ladder, but someone else now will be prohibited from doing that.
As odd as it sounds, what just occurred was the President just imposed a new ceiling in workplaces all over the country with no one passing a law, with no regulation being promulgated, just a declaration, and everything just changed for a lot of Americans all over the country, and a new cap was just placed in a lot of places.
People that worked for years to move to salary just got demoted back to hourly, and now, their boss is watching over them. Sadly, that boss is Washington, D.C. That is not right for Blue Wave and Silver Wave Boats in Seminole, Oklahoma. That is not right for businesses all over America.
If I get into an issue that is somewhat controversial, excuse me, but let me count the ways that ObamaCare demonstrates that Washington, D.C., wants to be the boss of every business and of every American.
ObamaCare, when it passed, said to every American: I know that you plan your budget and you plan your life in certain ways. We don't like how you do that. You are suddenly going to do it our way. You are going to buy a product you haven't purchased before, whether you are healthy or not, because we want you to, because we are your boss and we are going to tell you what products you are going to buy. If you want to buy a different insurance policy, I am sorry. That insurance policy is not good enough for us in Washington. You have got to pick the one that we pick in Washington.
That is not American. Now, it is a great thing to make sure that everyone in America has access to health care, but to then go to every family and say: It is going to be more than just access to, it is going to be requirement for, whether it fits your budget or not, and by the way, the government is going to pick what fits your budget.
That means Washington is suddenly the boss of you. In every workplace across the country, Washington, D.C., is now trying to decide which insurance policies work best for them--that is, Washington, not for the people in that company. Washington is not the boss of us. We are individuals that have freedom.
There is a company named Hobby Lobby. It happens to be based in my hometown. It is an absolutely amazing family that has lived out their faith for years. People see Hobby Lobby as this giant company.
Just a few decades ago, Hobby Lobby was in a garage and was a couple of sons cutting out picture frames for their dad, and they were selling these little tiny picture frames and starting their own tiny little frame shop.
That tiny little frame shop is now all over this country and is known to be this great retailer Hobby Lobby. They have practiced faith principles from the very beginning of their company. They close on Sundays. They close early on Wednesdays. They pay well more than minimum wage. They have always had great health care coverage.
They are a company that lives out biblical values in the workplace. They play Christian music even over the loudspeakers at the stores. They are a place that, when you shop, you enjoy shopping there. People love to take care of people there. That is part of their corporate mentality.
It is also a couple of owners and that family that is also opposed to abortion. They have the unusual belief that millions and millions of other Americans believe that children are valuable and that children are important and precious. They happen to have a faith that believes that the child deserves life.
Well, the President disagrees with that faith; so when ObamaCare--
literally, the regulations say to that business: You cannot operate your business under faith principles if that faith principle is different than the President's.
Why do I say that? Because if Hobby Lobby did not provide insurance at all--at all to their employees, they would be fined $2,000 per person, per year, if they refuse to provide insurance.
If they provide all insurance with everything included in it that ObamaCare requires, except for four abortifacient drugs--just leave out those four. Based on religious views they don't agree with, those four abortifacient drugs--if they don't provide those four, their fine is
$36,500 per employee, per year.
Let me run this past you again: $2,000 per employee if they provide nothing; $36,500 per employee if they provide everything, except those four abortifacient drugs.
How serious is this administration about being the boss of that company and telling them: If your faith practice is different than ours, it is obvious the consequences are shutting down a company?
{time} 2115
No one can afford a fine of $36,500. So, basically, the Green family has to choose to either live their faith or to keep their business open, but they can't do both at the same time.
What kind of country is this? What have we become when the simple freedom of religion can be swept aside by a Washington that says: If I don't agree with your faith, you have to change your practice?
Washington is not the boss of our companies. Washington is not the boss of our faith. We have a constitutional right to be able to live out our faith.
I received a letter and information from a great Oklahoma company in Stillwater, Oklahoma. It is Frontier Electronic Systems. It is interesting to be able to read what they are dealing with day-to-day just with Federal regulations. Here is one statement.
They wrote:
A phrase I have borrowed regarding most of these Federal regulations is that they ``do not scale.'' As a company with 113 employees, we are as accountable for compliance as if we had 113,000 employees. Needless to say, we have far fewer resources available--dollars and people power--than a larger employer has to ensure compliance. Also, compliance with many of the regulations requires some level of knowledge and experience in specific human resources specialties--staffing, benefits, et cetera--due to the fact that many of the laws are complicated and interrelated. Many smaller companies are fortunate to have even one experienced HR professional, let alone one that has extensive knowledge in multiple HR specialties.
What are they talking about with that?
Let me just give you an example. Because this great company also occasionally does some Federal contracting, here is the list of the regulations that this company must fulfill. To be a company and to be open in America right now, this is what this particular company has to fulfill. They have to follow these specific regulations:
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act; the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009--the regs that are in there; the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012; the Americans with Disabilities Act; the Black Lung Benefits Act; the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009; the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986; the Copeland Act of 1934; the Consumer Credit Protection Act; the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act; the Davis-Bacon Act; the Dodd-Frank Act of 2011; the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988; the Employee Polygraph Protection Act; the Employee Retirement Income Security Act; the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act; the Equal Pay Act; Executive Order 11246 of 1965; Executive Order 13201; the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act; the Federal Corrupt Practices Act; the Fair Credit Reporting Act; the Fair Labor Standards Act; the Family and Medical Leave Act; the Federal Employees' Compensation Act; the Federal Insurance Contributions Act; the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act; the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act; the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act; the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act; the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act of 2010; the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986; the Immigration and Nationality Act; the Jury Service and Selection Act; the Labor-
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act; the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007; the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act; the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act; the Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2008; the Mental Health Parity Act; the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act; the National Labor Relations Act; the Newborns' and Mothers' Health Protection Act of 1996; the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932; the Occupational Safety and Health Act; the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard; the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act--that is a big one; that is ObamaCare--the Pension Protection Act of 2006; the Pregnancy Discrimination Act; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890; title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures of 1978; the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994; the Veterans Benefits Improvement Act of 2004; the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act; the Walsh-Healey Act; the War Hazards Compensation Act; the Women's Health and Cancer Rights Act of 1998; the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act; and the Workforce Reinvestment and Adult Education Act.
Can anyone keep up with that? This business has to. With 113 employees, how many people does it take just to keep up with those regulations?
Mr. Speaker, we have a problem. We have a Washington, D.C., that has become arrogant. I don't think it is intentional. Quite frankly, I think everyone is trying to be very kind--overly kind--and they stack on one regulation on another, and there suddenly becomes a day when no company can keep up with this.
The attitude is simple: we know better than you. You won't run your company like it should be run, so we are going to come tell you how to run it. You won't run your family like it should be run, so we are going to tell you how to run your family farm. You won't run your bank like it should be run, so we are going to come run it for you. You won't run your insurance company like it should be run, so we are going to come run it for you. You mistreat your employees, so we are going to take over your health care system, and we will run it for you.
Mr. Speaker, that is not what we are as Americans. We are a nation that became strong because we are a nation that is free. We changed the world with a simple work ethic and the ability for people to be able to achieve success. That did not include a laundry list of protections from the Federal Government that swallow up a business.
Is there anything wrong with the government's setting the boundaries for business? No. It is part of the role of government. But when it becomes this, we are drowning. Now, suddenly, Washington is the boss of us, and this has got to turn around.
Mr. Speaker, simple decisions have to be made.
Can States do things that the Federal Government is currently doing?
Yes, there are things the Federal Government is doing it has no business doing. They are the responsibility of a State.
Should families go back to making decisions and businesses making decisions?
Yes, they should. That means there is risk. With risk comes great reward. We became the strongest and most prosperous nation on the planet because our people were not afraid of risk and the rest of the world was. We can get back to that, but we have got to make a simple decision: Is Washington the boss of us or are the American people the boss of Washington?
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up