STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
H.R. 6082 – Congressional Replacement of the President's Offshore Drilling Plan
(Rep. Hastings, R-WA, and 2 cosponsors)
The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 6082, which would undermine the targeted, science-based, and regionally-tailored offshore development strategy that the American people and the States have helped develop over the last three years.
The Administration is committed to promoting safe and responsible domestic oil and gas development as part of an all-of-the-above energy strategy to increase domestic production and reduce dependence on foreign oil. The Administration's recently announced five-year strategy for offshore oil and gas leasing makes areas containing more than 75 percent of estimated, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in our oceans available for exploration and development -- including all of the highest resource areas on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). This plan was developed following extensive input from the public, industry, States, Tribes, and others, and incorporates lessons learned from theDeepwater Horizon oil spill.
H.R. 6082 would require the Department of the Interior to open a number of new areas on the OCS. This action would be directed without Secretarial discretion to determine whether those areas are appropriate for leasing through balanced consideration of factors such as resource potential, State and local views and concerns, and the maturity of infrastructure needed to support oil and gas development, including in the event of an oil spill. The bill would mandate OCS lease sales along the east and west coast and elsewhere without regard for significant issues such as State and local concerns and impacts on important fishing areas and with inadequate consideration of military use conflicts.
The bill also would establish unworkable deadlines and substantive and procedural limitations on important environmental review and other analysis that is critical to complying with laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, and the Clean Water Act. Full compliance with these laws is important for the protection of citizens, communities, and the environment and is necessary in order to avoid costly and time-consuming litigation.
If the President were presented with H.R. 6082, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.
STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY
H.R. 4078 – Regulatory Freeze for Jobs Act of 2012
(Rep. Griffin, R-AR, and 20 cosponsors)
The Administration is committed to ensuring that regulations are smart and effective, that they are tailored to advance statutory goals in the most cost-effective and efficient manner, and that they minimize uncertainty. H.R. 4078, the Regulatory Freeze for Jobs Act, would undermine critical public health and safety protections, introduce needless complexity and uncertainty in agency decision-making, and interfere with agency performance of statutory mandates. Accordingly, the Administration strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 4078.
When a Federal agency promulgates a regulation, the agency must adhere to the robust and well understood procedural requirements of Federal law, including the Administrative Procedure Act, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, the Paperwork Reduction Act, and the Congressional Review Act. In addition, for decades, agency rulemaking has been governed by Executive Orders issued and followed by administrations of both political parties. These require regulatory agencies to promulgate regulations upon a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs, to consider regulatory alternatives, and to promote regulatory flexibility.
This Administration is committed to a regulatory system that is informed by science, cost-justified, and consistent with economic growth. Through Executive Order and the direction of the President, agencies must also ensure that they take into account the consequences of rulemaking on small businesses. Executive Order 13563 requires careful cost-benefit analysis, increased public participation, harmonization of rulemaking across agencies, flexible regulatory approaches, and a regulatory retrospective review. Through Executive Orders 13579 and 13610, the Administration also has taken important steps to promote systematic retrospective review of regulations by all agencies. Collectively, these requirements promote flexible, commonsense, cost-effective regulation.
Passage of H.R. 4078 would seriously undermine the existing framework. H.R. 4078 would also add layers of procedural burdens that would interfere with agency performance of statutory mandates, unnecessarily delay important public health and safety protections, and undermine and potentially delay important environmental reviews. For example, H.R. 4078 would create excessively complex permitting processes that would hamper economic growth. It would also spawn excessive regulatory litigation, and introduce redundant processes for litigation settlements. It also addresses numerous problems that do not exist, such as a moratorium on "midnight" rules.
In these ways and many others, the Regulatory Freeze for Jobs Act would impede the ability of agencies to protect public health, welfare, safety, and our environment, as well as to promote economic growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.
If the President were presented with H.R. 4078, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment