E-PARASITE's Sponsor, Lamar Smith, Was Against Massive Regulatory Compliance The Day Before He's For It

from the do-they-even-know-what-they're-doing? dept

Sometimes you just shake your head and wonder. As you now know, Rep. Lamar Smith just introduced the E-PARASITE Act, which puts incredibly massive regulatory compliance costs on large portions of the internet. Perhaps you think that Congress burdening companies -- especially tech companies, which, recent studies have shown, are responsible for much of the job growth in this country -- is par for the course. But, isn't it interesting to see that just the day before E-PARASITE came out, the House Judiciary Committee cleared a bill to try to limit the costs of regulatory compliance. The main supporter of the bill? You guessed it -- none other than the head of the House Judiciary Committee... Rep. Lamar Smith:
The bill “is an urgently needed antidote to this anti-democratic sentiment,” Smith said in prepared remarks. “It gives the people’s representatives in Congress the final say on whether Washington will impose major new regulations on the American economy, not unaccountable agency officials.”

Republicans point to a Small Business Administration analysis showing U.S. regulations cost $1.75 trillion to comply with in 2008 (that research doesn’t attempt to calculate societal benefits). House Republicans have focused much of their energy this Congress on regulations, voting to delay and weaken several Environmental Protection Agency rules reducing pollution from sources such as power plants, cement plants and industrial boilers.
So, basically, on Tuesday, Rep. Lamar Smith is against damaging regulations that increase compliance costs on the American economy and small businesses. Then, on Wednesday, he introduces a bill that will establish massive regulatory compliance costs on tons of American small businesses. Kinda makes you wonder if he even understands the legislation he's introducing.

Filed Under: compliance, e-parasites, lamar smith, regulations, rein

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    nasch (profile), 28 Oct 2011 @ 10:21am

    Re: Re: Your use of "par for the course" is wrong.

    A hole is classified by its par, meaning the number of strokes a skilled golfer should require to complete play of the hole.

    Do you seriously think that means the same thing as "an excellent score for an expert"?

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.