MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT

On 2024-12-17, Representative Delia C. Ramirez (D-IL-3) delivered a floor speech titled "MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT" in the House. The speech addressed taxes and also covered the environment, trade policy. It referenced legislation including HR115, HR1507, HRES1616.

MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT

Congressional Record, Volume 170 Issue 187 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024) [Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 187 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)] [House] [Pages H7253-H7259] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [ www.gpo.gov ] MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1616, I call up the bill (H.R. 115) to amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide for en bloc consideration in resolutions of disapproval for ``midnight rules'', and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kean of New Jersey). Pursuant to House Resolution 1616, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary, printed in the bill, is adopted, and the bill, as amended, is considered read. The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows: H.R. 115 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ``Midnight Rules Relief Act''. SEC. 2. EN BLOC CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF DISAPPROVAL PERTAINING TO ``MIDNIGHT RULES''. (a) In General.--Section 801(d) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``(4) In applying section 802 to rules described under paragraph (1), a joint resolution of disapproval may contain one or more such rules if the report under subsection (a)(1)(A) for each such rule was submitted during the final year of a President's term.''. (b) Text of Resolving Clause.--Section 802(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by inserting after ``resolving clause of which is'' the following: ``(except as otherwise provided in this subsection)''; and (2) by adding at the end the following: ``In the case of a joint resolution under section 801(d)(4), the matter after the resolving clause of such resolution shall be as follows: `That Congress disapproves the following rules: the rule submitted by the __ relating to __; and the rule submitted by the __ relating to __. Such rules shall have no force or effect.' (The blank spaces being appropriately filled in and additional clauses describing additional rules to be included as necessary).''. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill, as amended, shall be debatable for 1 hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and the ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary or their respective designees. The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler) each will control 30 minutes. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Biggs). General Leave Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Arizona? There was no objection. Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in support of H.R. 115, the Midnight Rules Relief Act. This is an important piece of legislation that will allow Congress to more effectively and efficiently oversee Federal agency rulemaking. Under the Congressional Review Act, known as the CRA, executive agencies must report all promulgated rules to both Chambers of Congress. This reporting requirement allows Congress to properly consider Federal regulations before they take effect. The CRA gives Congress the ability to pass a joint resolution to prevent an agency's rule from taking effect. The CRA's disapproval mechanism gives Congress a critical check on Federal administrative overreach. Currently, however, the CRA forces Congress to introduce a single, separate joint resolution for each agency rule it seeks to render unenforceable. This one-by-one limited joint resolution under the CRA slows Congress' oversight of agency rulemaking. Its inefficiency is most clear during the midnight rulemaking period of the last year of a President's term, when executive agencies historically issue substantially more regulations that last year of a President's term. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 115 would make Congress' oversight more efficient during this midnight rulemaking period by allowing Congress to introduce joint resolutions covering multiple agency rules during the final year of a President's term. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle may claim that this bill is only an attempt to slow down agency rulemaking or disincentivize Federal agencies from issuing rules on important issues, but that is incorrect. There are no provisions in this bill designed to slow down rulemaking. Rather, this bill would merely allow Congress to more efficiently exercise the oversight authority it already has and respond to the influx in agency regulations during the midnight hours of a President's term. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, despite the bill's title, H.R. 115 is not really intended to address midnight rules, but rather is an effort by our Republican colleagues to advance their antigovernment, deregulatory agenda under cover of darkness. This legislation may appear to be a modest change to the Congressional Review Act, but do not be fooled. It would enable the Republican-controlled 119th Congress to use a turbocharged CRA to nullify every rule issued by public agencies under the Biden administration for the entire year of 2024 in a single party-line vote. Under the CRA, if a rule is overturned, agencies are forever prohibited from considering, without new congressional authorization, a ``substantially similar'' rule, an unreviewable, vague, and harmful standard that would undermine agencies' statutory missions. Doing away with dozens of rules at once, as the Republicans intend with this bill, would substantially weaken agencies' ability to protect the public long into the future. While historically the CRA has been used sparingly, after Donald Trump's first inauguration in 2017, the Republican-controlled Congress used the CRA to repeal 16 rules issued by the Obama administration, an all-time high. Critical rules on teacher training, internet privacy protection, and the prevention of water pollution from coal mines, among many others, were all repealed over a few short weeks. It seems that Republicans have even bigger ambitions for the next deregulatory spree as they pursue their unabashedly antigovernment agenda. Rather than consider agency rules on their individual merits, they want to package as many rules as possible into a single resolution to eliminate them [[Page H7254]] all at once with little debate or deliberation over the merits of each individual rule. The results of this single vote could be catastrophic. {time} 1415 Right now, there are dozens of regulations at risk of summary execution, including rules that ensure the safety of bath seats for infants, implement the National Suicide Hotline Act, create dust-lead and lead pipe safety standards, update chemicals listed under the Toxic Substances Control Act, update heavy vehicle automatic emergency braking standards, and ensure all cell phones are hearing aid compatible, among others. Why do Republicans feel they even need this power? Maybe it is because they realize that many of the agency rules that they constantly rail against are actually popular with the American people. Taking a series of votes making it easier for corporations to pollute the environment or take advantage of the most vulnerable would likely not be well received. Better to overturn as many rules as possible in a single vote, reducing transparency and obscuring the consequences. Make no mistake, whether those votes are held individually or en bloc, the American people will be the ones to bear the consequences. With Republicans in charge of the House, Senate, and White House, it is likely that every rule the Biden administration has issued in the last year will be on the chopping block, along with the protections those rules provide to our constituents' health, safety, and economic well- being. In addition, striking down a bundle of rules at once means not only that each rule will not be considered on its own merits but also that months and years of agency time and taxpayer dollars, along with the expert analysis and public comments from industry, nonprofit groups, and individual Americans, all will have been wasted. Members on both sides of the aisle have recognized that midnight rulemaking, if left completely unchecked, can lead to abuses by the executive branch, but true midnight rules are rarely issued, and there is already a lookback period under the CRA to address rules promulgated at the end of any congressional term. If we are truly concerned about so-called midnight rules, we have other options to check them. For example, at the end of President George W. Bush's administration, I authored a bill that would delay implementation of rules issued near the end of a President's term, giving his or her successors a chance to review such rules and to determine if they should go forward. I believe there are ways we could work together in a bipartisan manner to address this issue. Where past efforts tried using a scalpel to address the problems associated with midnight rulemaking, today's Republicans would instead use a machete, hacking away at the Biden administration's regulatory agenda and furthering their ideological goal of radically transforming our government. None of this should be a surprise. H.R. 115 is a key plank of Project 2025, the blueprint for the incoming Trump administration. Project 2025 calls for ``dismantling'' the administrative state and argues that doing so must be ``a top priority for the next conservative President.'' That is because, according to th

Referenced legislation: HR115, HR115, HR1507, HRES1616