CSS Urges a No Vote on Sullivan Amendment 2996

February 2, 2016 | Download PDF

Sen. Sullivan’s Amendment would impose a radical “cut-go” model on the regulatory process requiring a regulation to be repealed before a new one could be put in place. This extreme and unwise approach to rulemaking would prohibit agencies from issuing critical safeguards to address new and emerging harms to the public until they first cut existing rules with compliance costs equal to or greater than the costs of the pending new rules. As the catastrophes in Flint, Michigan, and Porter Ranch, California illustrate, agencies must often respond to new challenges quickly. This amendment would block these efforts.

The White House already responded to this idea, when it issued a Statement of Administrative Policy, threatening a veto of H.R. 1155, the Searching for and Cutting Regulations that are Unnecessarily Burdensome Act (SCRUB), which has a similar “cut-go” provision. The Administration called the approach “problematic,” warning that it “would interfere with the ability of agencies to issue regulations that are essential for the protection of health, safety and the environment.”

Bottom Line: the Sullivan Amendment would impose a radical “cut-go” model on the regulatory process requiring a regulation to be repealed before a new one could be put in place.