POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript

Senate Hearing on Regulatory Reform (February 2017)

Original title: A GROWTH AGENDA: REDUCING UNNECESSARY REGULATORY BURDENS

January 1, 2017

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing record documents the formal input from industry and advocacy groups regarding the scope and impact of federal regulations, which informs potential legislative changes to agency rulemaking processes.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Industry Trade Associations

These groups provide input on how federal regulations impact business operations and compliance costs.

Consumer and Public Interest Advocacy Groups

These groups provide input on how regulatory changes may impact public health, safety, and consumer protections.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2017.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This document is the official record of a February 1, 2017, Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation hearing focused on reducing federal regulatory burdens. It includes statements from committee leadership and a comprehensive list of letters submitted by various industry groups, consumer advocates, and public interest organizations regarding regulatory policy.

Key Facts

  • The hearing was held on February 1, 2017, by the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  • The hearing focused on the topic of 'Reducing Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens'.
  • The record includes formal statements and letters from industry trade associations, including the Power Tool Institute, Association of American Railroads, and American Chemistry Council.
  • The record includes formal letters from consumer and public interest advocacy groups, including the Environmental Defense Action Fund, AFL-CIO, AFSCME, and the American Lung Association.
  • The document lists the full membership of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation for the 115th Congress.
  • The record includes an essay by Joseph P. Mohorovic, Commissioner of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.
  • The record references opposition to the 'Midnight Rules Relief Act of 2017' in submitted correspondence.

Why It Matters

The hearing record documents the formal input from industry and advocacy groups regarding the scope and impact of federal regulations, which informs potential legislative changes to agency rulemaking processes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was convened to discuss strategies for reducing federal regulatory burdens and to gather input from stakeholders on the impact of existing regulations.
Who provided input for this hearing?
Input was provided by a wide range of organizations, including industry trade groups like the Association of American Railroads and consumer/public interest groups like the American Lung Association and Public Citizen.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Early 2017 Regulatory Focus

The hearing record highlights a coordinated effort by the 115th Congress to address 'midnight rules' and general regulatory burdens immediately following the 2017 presidential transition.

Connected Entities

organizationSenate Committee on Commerce, Science, and TransportationThe committee holding the hearingMap →
personBill NelsonRanking Member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and TransportationMap →
organizationPower Tool InstituteSubmitted a prepared statementMap →
personJohn ThuneChairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and TransportationMap →
organizationAssociation of American RailroadsSubmitted a letter regarding regulatory policyMap →
organizationEnvironmental Defense Action FundSubmitted a letter regarding regulatory policyMap →
organizationAmerican Chemistry CouncilSubmitted a letter regarding regulatory policyMap →
organizationAFL-CIOSubmitted a letter regarding regulatory policyMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance60
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy50
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz20
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record