Friends of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Over-Regulated America, Indeed

Last week’s cover story of British news publication, The Economist,  highlighted the absurdities of America’s exploding regulatory state.  The article points out that while some regulations are so senseless it’s comical, their economic harm is no laughing matter. : 

Consider the Dodd-Frank law of 2010. Its aim was noble: to prevent another financial crisis ... But Dodd-Frank is far too complex and becoming more so. At 848 pages, it is 23 times longer than Glass-Steagall, the reform that followed the Wall Street crash of 1929. Worse, every other page demands that regulators fill in further detail. Some of these clarifications are hundreds of pages long. Just one bit, the “Volcker rule”, which aims to curb risky proprietary trading by banks, includes 383 questions that break down into 1,420 subquestions.

Hardly anyone has actually read Dodd-Frank, besides the Chinese government and our correspondent in New York (see article). Those who have struggle to make sense of it, not least because so much detail has yet to be filled in: of the 400 rules it mandates, only 93 have been finalised. So financial firms in America must prepare to comply with a law that is partly unintelligible and partly unknowable.

Even absent the myriad of hoops businesses are forced to jump through, the uncertainty created by regulatory monstrosities like Dodd-Frank make it exceedingly hard for business to grow when they don’t know what the ground rules will be.

The U.S. Chamber has been a leading voice in the effort to fight back against out-of-control regulation in America that harms businesses and makes it more expensive and difficult to grow and hire. We’re advocating for legislation that seeks to reign  rein in overzealous regulations and the agencies that create them, as well as implement parameters to take into account the economic impact of regulation moving forward.  

Click here to take action, and ask Congress to prevent future harmful regulations like these by supporting the Regulatory Accountability Act.

State of the Union: More Government or Free Enterprise?

If you watched the president’s State of the Union address last night, you witnessed a speech that focused on many issues central to our economy. Unfortunately, he missed the mark. As U.S. Chamber President Tom Donohue said after the speech:

"Too many of the solutions he proposed rest on higher taxes, more spending, and an avalanche of new regulations. The way to create the jobs Americans need is to grow our free enterprise economy, not to further expand the federal government."

We’re ready to work with anyone in Congress or the White House on solutions that will put Americans back to work without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Read the Chamber’s jobs plan here.

It’s possible. And it’s time to demand real solutions.

Please leave a comment below and share your thoughts on the president’s speech. You can also join us on Twitter for a national conversation taking place now.

2011 A Year in Grassroots

The Real Victims of Overregulation

Writing recently in National Review, Reps. Kevin McCarthy and Peter Roskam featured some job creators’ pleas for relief from the regulatory tsunami coming out of Washington.  

We thought they were worth sharing:

Spencer Weitman, a job creator from Alabama’s cement industry who attended President Obama’s joint-session address, told CNBC moments after the speech: “We were going to create jobs. We were going to have construction projects.” This was in reference to the devastating effects of the administration’s cement MACT rule, just one of the 219 regulations with a greater-than-$100 million effect on the economy.

Jeff Rose, of Vantage Data Centers, a California-based wholesale data-center provider, had this message for Washington on a recent visit: “In our experience it’s getting worse.” His colleague, Jennifer Fraser, explained how regulations can hinder their ability to deliver their product: “Part of our niche is speed to market . . . and the restrictions from a permitting perspective can put a project back nine months, ten months, 15 months.”

Wednesday’s passage of the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act in the House of Representatives marks a good first step in tackling the problem of over-regulation – and we’re urging the Senate to follow suit.  This bill would require that any regulation projected to cost businesses more than $100 million annually to be approved by Congress and the President before being implemented. 

These examples highlight just two of the many job creators who are being stifled by today’s regulatory environment. What types of regulations do you see businesses in your community struggling with?

Ghouls, Goblins and Government Regulation

Our Readers Agree: America Needs Fewer Government Barriers to Get Economy Back on Track

Forgive us if we’re left scratching our heads at the notion that the key to getting our economy back on track and Americans back to work is more federal government intervention.

If the past few years of growing government, growing deficits and continued high unemployment have shown us anything — it’s that bigger government isn’t the answer.

Apparently, we’re not the only ones who feel this way.

The results of our past two online surveys here on this blog, though not scientific, show that our readers agree.

For one thing, an overwhelming majority (73%) of our readers feel that “the policies enacted during the past few years punish success by American businesses.”

What policies might those be?  Well, for starters, we have the deeply flawed health care law, the creation of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, several anti-employer rulings by the National Labor Relations Board, and a litany of new regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Readers also responded in resounding majorities against tax hikes as part of a plan to cut the deficit, with (63%)   opposing tax increases as part of a deficit reduction package.”

A better solution would be to increase the amount of taxpayers in America (by boosting economic growth and, hence, employment), rather than increasing the amount of taxes paid by American employers.

Whether through higher taxes, new regulations, or bigger bureaucracies — the current power structure in D.C. has placed too many barriers in the way of our employers.

American job creators aren’t looking for handouts or special treatment.  They’re just looking for a fair playing field.

Regulatory Review is, 'too little too late'

This weekend, during the roundtable discussion about job creation on Meet the Press, CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo made a compelling point about businesses sitting on the sideline – not unable to invest, but unwilling to do so. The reason they’re sitting on their capital? The implosion of regulations over the last few years of the Obama Administration has made it nearly impossible to plan for the future.

Just this week, the President announced a regulatory review of existing regulations with the purpose of eliminating duplication and confusion from the federal regulatory register. Unfortunately, it didn't include the very rules that are hampering growth and causing uncertainty: regulation from the health care law, Dodd-Frank, and EPA.

What are your thoughts about the Administration’s plan to scale back regulations? Astep in the right direction? An action long overdue? Or simply a PR move?

Join the conversation by logging in and submitting your comments below.

A New 'Department of Jobs'?

Americans are facing a high unemployment rate, increased uncertainty and are looking to their elected officials to come up with a plan.  The Administration’s idea to getting jobs growth moving is…more bureaucracy?

Sounds ridiculous to us, too.

But, believe it or not, that’s exactly what the Obama Administration is proposing.  

The New York Times reports:

“The administration may also merge the Department of Commerce, the Office of the United States Trade Representative and some economic divisions at the State Department into a new agency, administration officials said. Possible names include the Department of Jobs or the Department of Competitiveness.”

That’s not a real jobs plan. It’s a political maneuver that continues this administration’s failed “action equals progress” approach to economic policy.

More government bureaucracy is not the solution to our jobs problem.

After all, our recent survey of small business owners found a commanding majority felt the best way government could help them would be to simply get out of the way.

Instead of a new government agency, perhaps the Administration and Congress should work to peel away the layers of already established regulation that are crippling our job creators; enact the free trade agreements that will allow small businesses to sell more goods; and reform the tax system so job creators have more money to invest and create new employment opportunity.

Visit America’s Town Hall today, and send a letter to your elected officials urging them to take action one the issues that mean the most to you; jobs.

The View from Main Street: A $2 Trillion Price Tag

Cross-posted from Chamberpost

Today’s hearing in the House Agriculture Committee will give Main Street businesses a chance to sound the alarm about the reckless pace and outrageous cost of derivatives regulation. 

Let’s hope the regulators get the message. 

Passage of the Dodd Frank Act kicked off an intense year of regulatory activity across the board, but the most concentrated, transformative effort has taken place in the over-the counter (OTC) derivatives market.

Unrealistic Congressional deadlines have forced regulators into a full sprint, cranking out rules without regard for full consideration or logical sequencing.  This leaves companies in the impossible position of, for instance, commenting on proposals that may not even apply to them because definitions and compliance standards are moving through the process out of order. 

The need for speed has also pushed the regulators to fudge their cost-benefit analyses.  For example, in April, the CFTC Inspector General issued a report pointing out that the CFTC generally employs a “one-size-fits-all” approach to cost-benefit analysis, and that the judgments of the Commission’s economists are often overruled.  By whom?  The lawyers, of course. 

Cutting corners in derivatives rulemaking can have huge consequences, not just for sophisticated players in the financial markets, but also for Main Street companies that use derivatives to hedge business risk. Derivatives provide a way for these companies to lock in commodity prices, interest rates, or foreign currency exchange rates to keep their prices stable.  The Chamber, through the Coalition for Derivatives End-Users, is working to preserve these critical risk management tools for manufacturers, agricultural producers, energy utilities, and others.

Despite the clear intent of Congress to shield these companies from the costliest derivatives rules, including margin (collateral) requirements, regulators have refused to concede the point, or even to come to an administration consensus about how they should be treated.  

For these end user companies, regulation doesn’t just mean paperwork and compliance costs; it means cash out the door that could otherwise be put to work expanding the business and creating jobs. A survey and analysis conducted by the Coalition found that a requirement to impose initial margin on OTC derivatives could lead to a loss of 100,000 to 120,000 jobs within S&P 500 companies alone.

Perhaps even more shocking was the administration’s own estimate of the economic impact of the margin rules.  The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released an analysis as part of the proposal that concluded banks and other businesses would have to set aside $2.05 trillion in working capital to comply with the new standards. 

If that’s not a jobs killer, I don’t know what is.

Certainly Uncertain: the Small Business Outlook

If Friday’s jobs report didn’t solidify it for you, America has a growth problem. Jobs aren’t created in a vacuum. We need economic growth to precede job growth, an idea that was strongly echoed in our second quarterly Small Business Outlook Survey.
 
Uncertainty is killing small businesses. When 1,409 small business owners were asked to rank their most important challenges, economic uncertainty was at the top concern (49%). The next four responses—the growing debt and deficit, Obamacare, over-regulation, and high taxes—all feed into that uncertainty.
 
Without knowing what the future holds, small companies are reluctant to invest in new employees and perform their traditional role as job creators. Seventy-nine percent of respondents said that taxation, regulation, and legislation make it harder for their business to hire more employees. Seventy-five percent said that the health care law specifically made it harder to hire.
 
What will help? Washington getting out of their way. Nearly four out of five small business owners believe that federal government regulations are at least somewhat unreasonable.
 
There is a silver lining. While more respondents believed that America’s best days were behind it (39%) than ahead (20%), they were more optimistic about their own businesses, with 39% feeling their best days were ahead of them and just 23% saying they were behind them. What does this mean for future growth? The inherent optimism of small businesses is alive and well. It’s now up to leaders in Washington to make sure the economic environment allows them to thrive.                
 
To learn more, download the survey.  

Theme of the Week: The Government is Killing My Business

This week, the U.S. Chamber’s Bruce Josten spoke with Fox Business about uncertainty, what it means for businesses, and the “literal torrent of regulation coming down the pike.”

Click here to urge your members of Congress to support the REINS act in order to get a handle on the overregulation bludgeoning  business and our economy.

A Tale of Two States

Last week, the Wall Street Journal editorial board published two separate editorials that highlighted the vastly different economic trajectories of two states: Texas and Illinois.

On the one hand, we have Texas, a state in which “some 37% of all net new American jobs since the recovery began were created.”

Then we have Illinois, a state that “has ranked 47th of the 50 states in job creation in the last decade, and has lost more private jobs (360,000) than the entire private work force of Delaware.”

As we said, two vastly different trajectories.  Perhaps the key to America’s economic recovery lies in looking what Texas has done right — and what Illinois has done wrong.

The Texas model?  According to the editorial:

Texas has no state income tax. Its regulatory conditions are contained and flexible. It is fiscally responsible and government is small. Its right-to-work law doesn't impose unions on businesses or employees. It is open to global trade and competition: Houston, San Antonio and El Paso are entrepôts for commerce, especially in the wake of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

The Illinois model?  Well, for starters:

Illinois gained nationwide notoriety in January when Governor Pat Quinn signed into law a 67% hike in the personal income tax rate while lifting the corporate tax rate to 9.5%, the fourth highest in the nation.

We’d also like to add that, according to a recent Harris Interactive survey released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, Illinois’ abusive lawsuit climate ranked 45th out of 50 states.  Meanwhile, Texas Governor Rick Perry last month signed into law the third major piece of lawsuit reform legislation enacted in the state during the past ten years.

Further, a recent report from the U.S. Chamber’s Workforce Freedom Initiative ranked Texas in the top tier of all states in terms of its labor and employment regulations — while Illinois ranked in the ... you guessed it ... bottom tier. 

In short, Texas is showing the success of an economy in which the government gets out of the way and lets the businesses do what they do best — create jobs.

Illinois, on the other hand, is showing what happens when you put big government first, increase the tax burden on job creators, and create a lawsuit climate that favors trial lawyers over jobs.

We choose the Texas model.  Which model will our elected officials in Washington, D.C. choose?

Choosing Bureaucracy Over Small Business

On January 18, 2011, President Obama signed an Executive Order requiring "Federal agencies to design cost-effective, evidence-based regulations that are compatible with economic growth, job creation, and competitiveness." In conjunction with this order, the President issued a memorandum "emphasizing the need to reduce burdens on small businesses whenever possible."

Given this order, a simple Senate measure that would require federal agencies to assess the impact of proposed regulations on America's small businesses should be a slam dunk, right? Wrong.  Yesterday, the Senate voted down an amendment, sponsored by Sen. Olympia Snow (R-ME), that would do just that. So, what possible reason would opponents of this common sense measure have for voting against it?

As Sen. Snowe said on the Senate floor yesterday:

"The breadth of regulations is truly punitive on the businesses of America .... It's clear many people don't understand how essential this amendment is to the survival of small business and to job creation.”

We agree.  The federal regulatory burden has grown too large, and it's one reason America's businesses feel so hamstrung as they try to recover from the downturn. But, quite honestly, even if you somehow don't agree that overregulation is a major problem — what good reason would you have for voting down this bill?

In a letter to Senators last week, the U.S. Chamber's Executive Vice President Bruce Josten made it clear where we stand on the issue:

"As a longstanding advocate for reducing excessive regulatory burdens on small businesses, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly urges you to support the Snowe amendment."

Thanks to the bipartisan contingent of 46 Senators who supported Sen. Snowe's measure.  You did right by America's job creators. However, opponents of this measure made clear that they support bureaucracy over jobs and big government over free enterprise.

To learn more about the types of regulations stifling the business community, join us on Facebook on Monday, June 13th as we live stream our Regulations Update Conference Call.  We’ll be joined by former Senator Evan Bayh, former Chief of Staff to the G.W. Bush Administration, Andy Card, and Executive Vice President of the U.S. Chamber, Bruce Josten, to give us the rundown on the current regulatory environment, , and what the Chamber is doing to rein in overwhelming regulations.

Fiscal Sanity ... Or More of the Same?

In her 1983 book, Sudden Death, the author Rita Mae Brown wrote what is now a oft-used quotation:  "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results."

Now, by that definition, we are hardly able to affix the label of "fiscal sanity" to the prescriptions currently being prescribed for America's economic ills.

What they have tried hasn't worked. Yet, in the wake of last week's dismal jobs reports, some politicians are calling for more of the same.

They want more taxpayer-funded "stimulus."

More taxes on job creators.

More regulation of American businesses.

More obstacles to domestic energy production. 

It hasn't worked. The jobs report proves it.  So why would they want to keep doing it "over and over again" but expect different results?

What we need to do is trying something different. Something new.

Last Sunday on This Week with Christian Amanpour, U.S. Chamber Chief Economist Marty Regalia said it best when he asserted that policymakers in D.C. are "trying to boost the economy in fits and starts" when they have to realize that "the economy is broad and diverse and what the government has to do is get out of the way."

Imagine that.  Big government getting out of the let America's job creators flourish.

Now, that would be certainly be a change in the direction of fiscal sanity.

Trio of Issues Key to the Future of American Small Business

As over 500 representatives of small business gathered together last week in D.C. for America’s Small Business Summit, their presence quickly confirmed what we have always believed; there certainly is no shortage of challenges facing our country’s small business owners.  However, some issues pose greater threats than others to these job creators.

One of the highlights of the last week’s three-day summit  was a panel where small business owners heard directly from U.S. Chamber executives on three such key issues impacting the future of their businesses, and the communities in which they operate:  gas prices, taxes and lawsuit abuse.

The attendees heard firsthand what is going on now, and what to expect next. Here is where we stand on these issues — and how you can get involved to make a difference:

 Gas Prices — The U.S. Chamber is fighting hard to ensure passage of three complimentary energy bills that would expand domestic energy production to create American jobs, ensure stable energy supply, and bring skyrocketing energy prices under control.  These bills have passed the House, but face a tough audience in the Senate.  America’s small businesses can’t afford further delay while jobs are being lost, and our ability to access affordable, reliable energy is blocked.  
 
 Taxes — The U.S. Chamber is at the forefront of the debate for common sense budget solutions that deal with our Nation’s long-term debt crisis, while empowering our job creators to grow and hire new workers.  Unfortunately, the President’s most recent budget — and his deficit reduction proposal — would rely heavily on tax increases on small business owners.
 
 We oppose the President’s approach, and will support only serious proposals that will reduce our deficit without raising taxes on small businesses.
 
 Lawsuit Reform — Lawsuit abuse is a drain on American employers, large and small.  That’s why the U.S. Chamber is fighting for realistic lawsuit reforms that balance the legal system to ensure a fair playing field for American small businesses— instead of a stacked deck in favor of opportunistic trial lawyers.  

 Right now, we are focused on passing H.R. 5 — the “HEALTH” Act — that would enact vital medical liability reforms that protect our health care providers from abusive lawsuits, and take a bite out of skyrocketing health care costs.  According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, these reforms could also save American taxpayers more than $40 billion over the next decade.  Please click here to email Congress to urge them to pass H.R. 5.

Of Course, these are only three of the wide array of issues we are working on each and every day.

We urge you to visit our Friends of the U.S. Chamber Action Page to learn more about the issues important to you — and how you can take action today.

Linking Government Contracts to Political Contributions Just Plain Wrong

Forgive us for thinking that something just doesn't smell right about the White House's proposed executive order to force all companies seeking government contracts to disclose all political contributions in excess of $5,000.

Don't get us wrong. Transparency is a good thing.

But this order wreaks of politics, and not just because it would exempt the free-political-spending big labor unions.

As Wall Street Journal columnist Kimberly Strassel writes this morning:

Ever audacious, the White House is spinning this as "reform," claiming taxpayers deserve to know how federal dollars being paid to contractors are being spent in campaigns. This might hold (a drop of) water if the executive order also required all the (liberal) entities that get billions in taxpayer dollars via federal grants and funding ... to disclose also. It doesn't.

Strassel's column goes on to quote U.S. Senator Susan Collins:

It has taken decades to create a federal contracting system based on "best prices, best value, best quality," Ms. Collins says, and the effect of the Obama order is to again have "politics play a role in determining who gets contracts."

We agree.

It just doesn't seem right to link government contracts in any way, shape or form to the amount of money you contributed (and to whom) in the most recent election. 

The potential for "pay-to-play" is simply too great, and right now we need to be doing everything possible to restore Americans' faith in elected government, rather than tear it down any further.

Just as justice is blind, so should be the awarding of taxpayer-funded government contracts where political affiliation is concerned.

What should only matter is whether contractors can provide the best work at the lowest cost to serve the taxpayers.

Please email the White House today to urge them to drop this bad idea.

‘The Thing That Scares Me the Most: What’s Next?’

The headline is a quote from small business owner Phil Kennedy, who runs his family’s business, Comanche Lumber Company, in Lawton, Oklahoma. Kennedy participated with Bill Miller, U.S. Chamber senior vice president of Political Affairs and Federation Relations, and Marty Regalia, senior vice president of Economic Policy and chief economist, on a conference call today to release the results of the Chamber’s inaugural Small Business Outlook Survey—a nationwide survey of 900 small business owners.

According to the survey, 55% of respondents cited economic uncertainty as their greatest hiring obstacle, and 35% said Washington uncertainty impacted growth. Thirty-five percent cited too little revenue as their greatest obstacle. Seventy percent of respondents said they do not plan to hire new employees next year, and 9% will continue layoffs. Here are a few other notable results:

• Two of the top issues of concern are America’s debt and the health care law. Eighty percent of respondents said America’s debt and deficit have a negative impact on their business, and 72% said the health care law has made hiring more difficult.
• Small businesses want Washington to get out of the way. In a commanding majority, 79% of respondents said they want more certainty, and only 14% said they want more government assistance.
• By a 73% to 17% margin, respondents said that the climate of the last two years has hindered their growth. Respondents were split in how they view the next two years, with 38% believing the climate will improve, 37% believing that it will worsen, and the remainder uncertain

Here’s more of what Kennedy, the small business owner, had to say:

The last 3 years have been some of the most challenging times I’ve faced in business. All of the findings in this survey mirror our own experiences, from hiring freezes because of the implementation of the new health care law and employer mandates, to uncertainty over whether it’s in our best interest to invest and hire.

My biggest concern is the lack of understanding Washington has of small business. The U.S. Chamber is leading the fight to remove the obstacles, and I appreciate their effort to listen to small businesses and carry the message to the Hill.

Happening Today: Hear What Small Business is Saying

Ever wonder what other small businesses are saying about the economy, legislative climate, and their own company’s future? We do too – and so we asked.

This afternoon, we will be rolling out our inaugural Small Business Outlook Survey results, with the key findings from our nationwide survey of small business owners.

The call will be held with U.S. Chamber members; however, we are opening it to the public by streaming the call live on Facebook today at 3:00 pm ET. When you ‘like’ the U.S. Chamber’s Facebook page, you’ll gain access to the call and hear what small businesses are saying and what we’re doing to be their voice in Washington.

These results will serve as the foundation for the Chamber's grassroots efforts this summer, kicking off with America's Small Business Summit 2011, being held May 23-25.

I ecourage you to join the conversation submitting your questions using the hash tag #WhatBizSays on Twitter. Policy experts will be standing by to respond.

Typically reserved for U.S. Chamber members, we are opening today’s call to all interested parties because the voice of business needs to be heard far and wide. Log-on to Facebook at 3:00 p.m. ET to hear what they’re saying.

Fixing What's Broken

Regulatory reform must be a part of growing the economy and creating jobs again. To understand just how important it is, consider a recent study by the Phoenix Center, which found that a five percent reduction in the federal regulatory budget (about $2.8 billion) would result in an increase of 1.2 million jobs and about $75 billion in expanded private-sector GDP each year. It’s time to fix what’s broken by restoring badly needed balance, restraint, and common sense to the process.

NCF Hosts the 10th Annual Aviation Summit

With increased delays, mounting fares, and additional security, traveling by air isn’t as carefree as it once was.  All hassles aside, air transportation is still an integral part of the American economy.   To report on the health of their industry, a panel of CEO’s from Jet Blue Airways, U.S. Airways, FedEx Express, and Cessna Aircraft Co. came together yesterday at the  National Chamber Foundation's 10th annual Aviation Summit held at the U.S. Chamber.  

It’s no surprise that those in the aviation industry aren’t an exception to the list of companies and businesses looking to the administration for leadership and reform.  The sharp rise in gas prices, a reform of tax policy, and regulations are among the most pressing aviation issues.  Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) President Craig Fuller, who’s organization helped to sponsor the event, moderated a panel during the summit. As he said, "By bringing the concerns of the general aviation community to a forum like this one, we are able to further understanding of the issues that affect how we fly now and far into the future."

U.S. Chamber Briefs the Bloggers on Regulation

Three U.S. Chamber executives are participating in a Bloggers Briefing today at 12 P.M. EST, as we host the event at our Washington headquarters.  The briefing will highlight what major legislative dilemmas we are facing in terms of health care, energy, and labor policies.  U.S. Chamber’s executive VP for Government affairs, Bruce Josten, will be joined by colleagues Bill Kovacs and Randy Johnson to weigh in on the decisions that unaccountable federal agencies are making  what the Chamber is doing to restore balance to the regulatory process

I will be checking in to report post-briefing, but in the meantime follow along on Twitter and participate by sending questions and comments and including #TBB in your tweets.

Case #5: The Greenhouse Gas Power Grab

This week the U.S. Chamber released its fifth study in the series of weekly Cases for Regulatory Reform.  This week’s case will examine the unprecedented power of the EPA and the agency’s exploding ability power, which is stifling job creation and economic growth.  The size and scope of the EPA has recently faced scrutiny, with many recognizing the dangerous impact of the regulating carbon emissions under the Clean Air Act.

Last week, the Energy Tax Protection Act, aimed at limiting the EPA’s scope, passed in the House and will soon be introduced in the Senate. In addition to Congress’ specific EPA measures, the House and Senate have introduced the "Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS)" bills, comprehensive legislation that will ensure all new regulations are approved by Congress and that we have a voice in the debate.

Learn more about the REINS Act and send a letter to your members of Congress urging their support of these important measures now.

CCMC Keeping Its Head in the CFPB Game

Following last week’s successful Capital Markets Summit, which featured high profile speakers Elizabeth Warren and Jamie Dimon, the U.S. Chamber’s Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness is keeping its head in the CFPB game. This afternoon Jess Sharp, executive director of CCMC will testify at a hearing formally titled, “Legislative Proposals to Improve the Structure of the CFPB,” alongside representatives from five other financial services trade groups.  The hearing is the latest in the ongoing debate over how to structure Washington’s newest regulatory body.

Case #4: When Regulations Go Boom, Small Business Goes Bust

Learn more about our Project on Regulatory Reform which will work to continually tell the story to the American people about the massive costs of procedural defects and excessive regulations on jobs and on their personal and economic freedom.