Volume 143, No. 64 covering the 1st Session of the 105th Congress (1997 - 1998) 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.
“THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION--AN EFFECTIVE VOICE FOR SMALL BUSINESS?” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Senate section on pages S4618-S4619 on May 15, 1997.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION--AN EFFECTIVE VOICE FOR SMALL
BUSINESS?
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to call on the Small Business Administration (SBA) to fulfill its role as advocate for the hardworking men and women who have made small business the backbone of our nation's economy. As Chairman of the Committee on Small Business, I have heard countless hours of testimony from small businesses who look to the SBA for information assistance and advocacy.
The SBA's role as an effective voice for small business within the executive branch recently came under fire during the final days of the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) review of an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation to expand the number of industries covered by the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting requirements. The proposed inclusion of two industries, comprised predominantly of small businesses, was brought into question by the SBA and numerous Members of Congress. The affected small businesses had data to support their case for exclusion, and some of the data on which EPA had based its proposed rule was inaccurate. Despite the strength of their case, these small businesses found their views unwelcome at EPA. They appropriately turned to SBA to articulate the small business views to the administration.
As the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business, I was dismayed when effective advocacy by the SBA on behalf of small business was criticized as improper. In a letter sent to SBA Administrator Aida Alvarez, efforts to communicate the small business perspective were characterized as ``elements within [SBA] . . . actively working to undermine [the TRI] initiative.'' The important working relationship between SBA and its small business constituency was alleged to be an improper use of ``taxpayer funds to conduct lobbying efforts on behalf of private lobbyists. . . .'' In response to this criticism, the SBA temporarily removed staff from working on TRI and asked the Inspector General to review the matter.
The Ranking Minority member on the Committee, Senator Kerry, joined me in sending a letter to the Administrator of the SBA, expressing our support for the Office of Advocacy and the SBA's role on behalf of small businesses. I ask that the text of our letter and the response I recently received from James F. Hoobler, Inspector General for the SBA, be printed in the Record. I am delighted to say that the role of the SBA, the Office of Advocacy and the individual staff member, whose dedication to the cause of small business was unfairly criticized, were found to have ``acted properly and ethically.'' The Inspector General added, ``SBA is statutorily mandated to support and speak up for the interests of small business. . . . To do otherwise would be contrary to its mandated responsibilities.''
The SBA worked closely with the affected small businesses in an effort to ensure that their side of the story was heard. The SBA's voice apparently caught the ear of OMB, which prolonged its consideration of the rule beyond the usual 90-day review period. The debate that ensured on the merits of the rule and the basis for regulating the small employers is exactly the type of policy discussion the SBA should facilitate. In fact, during her confirmation hearing before the Committee on Small Business, SBA Administrator Aida Alvarez announced her commitment to being an effective voice for small business within the Administration. Ms. Alvarez pledged to carry the views and concerns of small business to the agencies involved and to be an advocate for small business at the Cabinet table and in her interactions with the President. I sincerely hope Administrator Alvarez will keep to her word. On the TRI rule, however, the Clinton administration did not. No accommodation, such as a threshold for reporting to cover only those sectors of the industry that arguably merited coverage, was made for the small businesses in the affected industries.
Mr. President, it is well known that federal regulations have historically imposed a disproportionate burden on small business. Last year, we enacted the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act--better known to small businesses as the Red Tape Reduction Act--to provide tools to ensure that small businesses get a fair shake in agency rulemakings and enforcement actions. As the author of the Red Tape Reduction Act and Chairman of the Committee on Small Business, I am committed to ensuring that small businesses have the opportunity to use the tools provided by Congress, including access to and effective representation by SBA. The SBA and its Office of Advocacy has an important advocacy role to play on behalf of the hardworking men and women whose entrepreneurial spirit makes the small business sector so vibrant. In addition to providing information and assistance, the SBA must rededicate itself to being an effective voice for small business.
The material follows:
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Small Business,
Washington, DC, April 16, 1997.Hon. Aida Alvarez,Administrator, U.S. Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC.
Dear Administrator Alvarez: Questions have been raised regarding the activities of the Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy. As the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business, we would agree that any credible allegations of improper conduct should be looked into. We are equally convinced, however, that being a determined advocate for the concerns of small businesses is not improper conduct by the Chief Counsel of Advocacy or his employees. The statutory role of SBA as the voice for small business within the executive branch, a role that has been enhanced after last year's passage of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, must not be compromised.
As the Administrator of SBA, you are keenly aware that the Office of Advocacy is expected to work with and on behalf of small business and their representatives as an essential part of its statutory mission. The effectiveness of SBA on behalf of our nation's small entrepreneurs and employers depends on communication with individual small businesses, their trade associations and other representatives. We trust that as SBA Administrator you will reject any attempt to chill proactive advocacy for small businesses by the Chief Counsel and others at SBA. To do otherwise would send a clear and alarming signal to small businesses, and would call into question the ability of SBA to carry out the critical responsibilities given to it under SBREFA and other laws.
We hope you share our commitment to ensuring that the unique concerns and interests of small businesses are given appropriate consideration by executive branch agencies. We look forward to learning what efforts you will take to support the important role historically played by the SBA and its Office of Advocacy as an effective voice for small business.
Sincerely,
Christopher S. Bond,Chairman.
____
U.S. Small Business Administration,
Washington, DC, April 29, 1997.Hon. Christopher S. Bond,Chairman, Committee on Small Business, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Bond: Thank you for your and Senator Kerry's supportive letter of April 16, 1997, to SBA Administrator Alvarez. In view of your strong conviction in the role of the SBA as a voice for small business, I believe you should be aware of the results of a recent investigation conducted by my office.
Subsequent to receipt of a complaint about possible improper activity by SBA's Office of Advocacy in connection with proposed expansion of the Toxic Release Inventory, my Investigations Division conducted a thorough inquiry into the allegations. We found that the Office of Advocacy acted properly and ethically. Moreover, as you pointed out, SBA is statutorily-mandated to support and speak up for the interests of small business. During the matter in question, the Office of Advocacy was carrying out its mission in support of small business. To do otherwise would be contrary to its mandated responsibilities.
Again, thank you for the vote of confidence, and, rest assured, my office would not hesitate to take action if SBA activities were improper. Should you, or your staff, have any questions, please contact Assistant Inspector General for Investigations Steve Marica at (202) 205-6220 and refer to Office of Inspector General file number 07-0497-03.
Sincerely,
James F. Hoobler,Inspector General.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up