Rules Committee Hearing S.J. Res. 13 and 31

Committee on Rules

2025-05-19

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

The Rules Committee convened to consider two measures: SJRES 13, concerning a rule under the Bank Merger Act, and SJRES 31, regarding a rule under the Clean Air Act. The meeting featured sharp disagreements, particularly on the merits of overturning Biden-era regulations and the transparency of the legislative process for an upcoming budget reconciliation bill.

Themes

SJRES 13: Disapproving the Bank Merger Act Rule

Proponents of the disapproval resolution argued that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's (OCC) bank merger rule is flawed and biased, as it discourages competition, creates excessive red tape, and erodes the financial system's integrity [ 00:19:54-00:19:58 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. This rule was said to hinder small and mid-sized banks by making mergers more costly and complicated, thus restricting access to credit for customers . Mergers are seen as crucial for community and regional banks to expand and stay competitive against larger institutions . Overturning the rule would assert Congress's Article I authority and prevent similar future rules without legislative approval .

Opponents countered that there is no shortage of large banks, and regulators have historically rubber-stamped mergers, leading to less competition and more costly products for consumers [ 00:20:36-00:20:56 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. They highlighted a significant decline in community banks since the last merger rejection in 2003 [ 00:20:57-00:21:11 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. The OCC rule, initiated under a Biden executive order, aimed to increase transparency and scrutiny for mergers, particularly for larger banks, and its elimination would accelerate the demise of community banks vital for small businesses . Critics also argued that the resolution is moot as the acting Comptroller had already rescinded the rule, and that weakening regulatory oversight could lead to financial instability, drawing parallels to the 2008 crisis .

SJRES 31: Disapproving the Clean Air Act Rule

Supporters of SJRES 31 stated that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) "once-in, always-in" rule, implemented by the Biden administration, is misguided and unfairly burdens American energy producers . They argued it disincentivizes businesses from reducing emissions because facilities designated as "major sources" cannot be reclassified as "area sources" even after implementing pollution controls . This policy, according to proponents, punishes positive environmental actions and leads to capital being spent on compliance rather than innovation, potentially driving businesses overseas to avoid stringent regulations .

Opponents strongly opposed the resolution, asserting it would make the air unsafe to breathe and actively harm Americans' health . They argued the EPA rule ensures large industrial facilities continue to control hazardous air pollutants like mercury, lead, and PCBs, which are known to cause cancer, birth defects, and neurological problems . Rescinding the rule would allow these major sources to increase toxic air pollution, endangering communities, especially children vulnerable to conditions like asthma . Critics expressed concern that this resolution prioritizes corporate interests over public health and reverses progress made under the Clean Air Act, a bipartisan success .

Process Concerns Regarding Budget Reconciliation

A significant portion of the discussion revolved around the majority's plan to consider a budget reconciliation bill at 1:00 AM on Wednesday. Minority members criticized this timing as a "shameful" attempt to avoid public scrutiny and prevent people from knowing the bill's contents, which they alleged would grant massive tax cuts to billionaires at the expense of Medicaid and food assistance . They questioned the "emergency" nature of the meeting and the lack of a current Congressional Budget Office (CBO) score, arguing that rushing the bill without full transparency and analysis is "no way to govern" [ 02:38:10-02:38:11 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
. Majority members defended the schedule, citing time constraints before the Memorial Day recess and stating that the bill's contents are largely known, with "tweaks" being negotiated . They also asserted that Congressional Review Acts (CRAs) are crucial tools for Congress to reclaim authority from the executive branch .

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely partisan and contentious, marked by frequent direct confrontations between the majority and minority members . The discussion on the budget reconciliation bill, in particular, generated palpable frustration and exasperation from the minority regarding perceived lack of transparency and procedural fairness . While some attempts were made to foster a more collegial debate, the underlying political disagreements and criticisms of governing strategies contributed to a sharp and polarized atmosphere [ 00:56:48-00:56:56 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
.

Participants

Transcript

Good afternoon.  The committee will come to order.  Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recess at any time.  Today, the Rules Committee is convening to consider two separate measures, SJRES 13 and SJRES 31.  SJRES 13 provides for congressional disapproval of a rule submitted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency   of the Department of the Treasury relating to the review of applications under the Bank Merger Act.  The OCC's bank merger rule is as biased as it is flawed.  It discourages competition within the industry, erects swaths of red tape that ensnare bank merger application, and erodes the integrity of our financial system.  This rule is not grounded in sound policy.   It serves to kneecap small and mid-sized banks while restricting access to credit for millions of customers across the country.  This is yet another Biden-era rule that we must dispense with, and we intend on doing so.  SJRES 31 provides for congressional disapproval of a rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to   quote, review a final rule reclassification of major sources as area sources under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, end quote.  EPA's rule is misguided.  It unfairly binds American energy producers in a regulatory straitjacket.   while removing a commonsense incentive for them to lower their own emissions.  The former rule that was put into place during President Trump's previous term encouraged these energy producers to take positive and substantive steps to reduce emissions without the looming threat of a regulatory barrage.
But this EPA rule runs counter to that, and it operates on a premise   That is unjust.  What America needs is a vigorous energy manufacturing posture and not one that's riddled with endless regulatory hoops that energy producers are required to jump through.  Achieving American energy dominance is not found through overregulation.  It's found through good, sensible policies that are not heavy-handed and inflexible.   The EPA's rule is not grounded in good, sensible policy, and that's precisely why it must be overturned.  Over the last four years, the private sector found itself contorted into knots thanks to the previous administration's proclivity to regulate the hell out of everything.  But it's a new year, a new Congress, and new administration.  We're moving in a better direction.   With that, I look forward to today's discussion, and I now yield to Mr. McGovern for any comments he wishes to make.  Well, thank you, Madam Chair.  Let me just say, these are two lousy, terrible measures that you have us considering here today.  More help for big banks and big polluters.  That's been the entire Republican agenda so far.  Help the polluters, help the banks, help Wall Street, help the CEOs.  You guys want to help everyone except everyday people who actually need help.   It's honestly beyond shameful.  But to be honest, it's not even worth it to talk about these CRAs.  What I do want to talk about is the fact that this morning, after midnight actually, Republicans told us that we would be considering their budget reconciliation bill at 1 o'clock in the morning on Wednesday.  If Trump's big, beautiful bill is so great, why not debate it when people are still awake?
Wouldn't you want everyone to know how great it is?  Why are you debating it at 1 o'clock in the morning?  I think that's prime time in Guam.  Any person with half a brain cell can immediately figure out why you want to notice a meeting for 1 a.m.  It's because you don't want people to know what's in your bill.  Remember what Trump said?  Close your eyes and vote for it.  That's exactly what you're all doing because you all know exactly what the bill does, how unpopular it is.   and what regular Americans think of it.  It's going to give a huge, massive, historic tax cut to billionaires paid for by stealing, stealing from the American people, ripping away Medicaid from parents and grandparents, ripping away food assistance from kids.  This is night.  This is not hyperbole, my friends.  We're not fearmongering.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up