Introduced by Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), the Regulatory Accountability Act seeks to reform the regulatory process, making it more transparent for the American people and more accountable to Congress. It also includes language to reverse the Chevron deference, which has been used by regulatory agencies to enact law without judicial review.

This resolution of disapproval of the Congressional Review Act nullifies the Securities and Exchange Commission's Disclosure of Payments by Resource Extraction Issuers rule. Promulgated under the authority of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or Dodd-Frank, this rule requires resource extraction issuers to include in annual reports the payment of any entity controlled by the regulated business to foreign governments or the United States government "for the purpose of the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals." The Securities and Exchange Commission projects initial compliance costs between $239 million and $700 million and annual compliance costs between $96 million and $591 million.

This resolution of disapproval of the Congressional Review Act nullifies the Department of the Interior's Stream Protection Rule. With an annual estimated cost of $81 million, according to the Department of the Interior's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, the Stream Protection Rule is another blow to the coal industry, which was a favorite target of the Obama administration. The National Mining Association estimates that rule will lead to billions of dollars in lost revenues to state and local governments, as well as the loss of between 113,000 and 280,000 jobs.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act nullifies a the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation. This regulation requires federal contractors to disclose decisions on the reporting of violations of federal labor laws and creates paycheck transparency protections for employees of federal contractors. The rule is expected to cost employers $458.3 million in the first year, $413.7 million in the second year, and between $398.5 million and $400 million annually thereafter.

This resolution of disapproval of the Congressional Review Act nullifies Bureau of Land Management’s Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation Rule. With annual compliance costs between $114 million and $279 million, the so-called “venting and flaring” rule purports to reduce waste from “reduce the waste of natural gas from mineral leases administered” by the Bureau of Land Management. In reality, the purpose of the rule is to discourage oil and gas production on land overseen by the agency. The Bureau of Land Management estimates annual compliance costs between $114 million and $279 million.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act, which gives Congress authority to effectively nullify regulations submitted for review by federal agencies within 60 legislative days, would cancel the Department of Education’s Accountability and State Plans Rule. The Department of Education’s Accountability and State Plans Rule implements part of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and leaves open a loophole that federal bureaucrats could exploit to force Common Core on states that haven't implemented the standards. Education officials from several states and local jurisdictions strongly opposed the rule when it was being crafted.

Introduced by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act would eliminate the antitrust exemption the health insurance industry currently has under the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945. One of the main problems with the health care system today is the protections put in place by the federal government that cater to special interest groups. The Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act promotes the free market and competition by changing a law put in place nearly 70 years ago to reflect the current market we have today. It would also ensure that the health insurance industry complies with the same laws other businesses do.

The Small Business Health Fairness Act, H.R. 1101, sponsored by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Texas), would allow small businesses to join together through association health plans (AHPs) to provide employees with more affordable health insurance coverage. ObamaCare has caused the cost of health insurance coverage to rise, making it difficult for small businesses to continue offering health insurance coverage to employees. The Small Business Health Fairness Act would help level the playing field for small businesses, which don’t have the negotiating power of larger firms and exemptions under Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), and lower administrative costs related to health insurance.

The process for the Consolidated Appropriations Act, which funds the federal government for the remainder of FY 2017, could not have been worse. This massive, nearly 1,700-page spending measure was negotiated behind closed doors between congressional leadership from both chambers and appropriators. With a Republican-controlled Congress and a Republican president, this spending bill reflects Obama-era spending levels. The bill annualizes base discretionary spending for FY 2017 at $1.07 trillion. This spending level blows through the spending caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011 by $30 billion. The bill spends an additional $106 billion for overseas contingency operations, disaster relief, and other spending, which isn’t counted toward the spending caps. In total, the bill authorizes more than $1.175 trillion in annualized discretionary spending for FY 2017. The bill also falls short of promoting conservative priorities. While the bill does renew the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program and does not include funding for ObamaCare’s cost-sharing subsidies, it allocates nearly $296 million to bail out Puerto Rico’s Medicaid program, preserves current spending levels for the Environmental Protection Agency, increases spending for the National Institutes of Health and the National Endowment for the Arts, and provides a bailout for a private sector labor union.

While there is a need to protect law enforcement officers who are performing their duties, the Probation Officer Protection Act is an answer in search of a problem. Interference with a federal probation officer is already unlawful and current law already allows a law enforcement officer to arrest an individual or individuals who obstruct a federal probation officer during the performance of their duties. The instances in which third parties obstruct a federal probation officer are rare. While probationers have lost some of their Fourth Amendment rights, third parties have not. The Probation Officer Protection Act could lead to instances in which the Fourth Amendments rights of third parties are infringed because of overly broad language in Section 2(b) or interpretations of words in it, such as “intimidation” or “interference.” Additionally, the “rules and regulations” under which the arrest authority of federal probation officers will be determined by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, not by Congress. This creates yet another situation in which Congress is relenting its constitutional authority to another branch of the federal government.

The Financial CHOICE Act would eliminate the job-killing regulations that Dodd-Frank has instituted, rein in the CFPB, increase penalties for financial institutions who engage in illicit practices, and provide other reforms necessary to address the issues that earlier “well intentioned” legislation instituted. While we are disappointed and frustrated that language in the bill that would have repealed the Durbin amendment was removed by the House Rules Committee, if passed, the Financial CHOICE Act will open up the market in the financial sector that would help create jobs and invite new businesses. This will drive compliance costs down, increase the number of banks that will be created, and provide the necessary oversight to the federal government.

Sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif,), the amendment would strike the proposed prohibition against another round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC). A 2013 report by the conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) estimated that the first four rounds of BRAC save approximately $8 billion annually. The 2005 BRAC is saving nearly $4 billion annually.

Sponsored by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), the amendment would require that Secretary of Labor conduct determinations for the prevailing wage for defense-related construction projects. Currently, the Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division uses survey data that is unreliable and inflates the prevailing wage. The amendment would lower the cost of defense-related construction projects, saving taxpayers money.

This resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) would cancel the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) arbitration rule. The CFPB’s arbitration rule is a giveaway to trial lawyers. The rule ostensibly bans contractual arbitration clauses related to consumer financial products offered by banks and other financial sector firms. This severely limits consumers’ ability to enter into arbitration during disputes. Trbitration is an easier and quicker process for consumers to resolve issues, but lawyers don’t make much money from this process. The rule, however, will encourage trial lawyers to pursue more class-action lawsuits, which take longer and result in smaller payouts to consumers.

Sponsored by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), this amendment would eliminate the CBO’s Budget Analysis Division. The amendment transfers the authority of the division to the Director of the CBO.

Sponsored by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), this amendment would make a 1 percent across the board rescission to Division D of H.R. 3219 – the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.

For the better part of a decade, congressional Republicans pledged to repeal ObamaCare. Between 2011 and 2015, the House passed legislation to fully repeal ObamaCare on four separate occasions before eventually using reconciliation for partial repeal. Roughly 18 months ago, the House passed the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act, H.R. 3762, with only three Republican defections. The bill repealed as much of ObamaCare as possible under the rules of reconciliation, including the tax and cost sharing subsidies, Medicaid expansion, and the taxes that came with the law. The bill would have reduced the federal budget deficit by $516 billion over ten years. House Republicans must continue to work diligently to repeal ObamaCare. With the American health insurance system facing so many problems because of ObamaCare – among which are skyrocketing premiums and fewer choices in the non-group market – Republicans can’t give up. A discharge petition is a legislative tool that requires the signatures of 218 members of the House to immediately bring a bill to the floor for a vote.

Sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), this amendment would reduce funding for the Essential Air Service program by $150 million and transfer the savings to the Spending Reduction Account. The Essential Air Service subsidizes flights to small communities in the United States and its territories. These flights, however, are often half full or mostly empty, within driving distance, and heavily subsidized.

Sponsored by Rep. Ted Budd (R-N.C.), this amendment would eliminate a planned $900 million earmark for an upgrade of an Amtrak rail line between Newark, New Jersey and New York City. Supposedly, the House has a moratorium on earmarks. Yet, this would be one of the largest ever included in an appropriations package. This amendment would redirect $474 million to deficit reduction and $400 million to New Starts Account.

Sponsored by Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.), this amendment would defund Amtrak, a federally funded passenger railroad service. Amtrak routinely loses money, failing to cover its operating costs through fares paid by passengers. This amendment would save $1.1 billion.

Sponsored by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), this amendment would cut funding for the Environmental Protection Administration’s (EPA) Environmental Programs and Management Account by $10.234 million and redirect the savings to the EPA’s Spending Reduction Account.

As amended by the Senate, H.R. 601 would increase the debt limit and fund the federal government through December 8 without any spending or regulatory reforms. There are no guarantees that the situation will be any different when Congress revisits the issue in December. We have reached a critical point. At a time when grassroots conservative engagement is essential to pass priorities like fundamental tax reform, the administration and a Republican-controlled Congress are playing right into the hands of leftists like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. A debt limit increase without any spending or regulatory reforms would only further anger grassroots conservatives, risking their support for other priorities.

Sponsored by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), this amendment would make a 1 percent across the board rescission to Division A, which authorizes appropriations for Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

Sponsored by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), this amendment would reduce the appropriation to the EPA for FY 2018 by $1.869 billion.

Sponsored by Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wis.), this amendment would reduce the funding for the National Labor Relations Board (NRLB) by $99 million and transfer the savings to the Spending Reduction Account.

Sponsored by Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), this amendment would make a 1 percent across the board rescission to Division F, which authorizes appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies.

The Republican Study Committee’s (RSC) FY 2018 budget, introduced as an amendment by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), would reduce federal spending by more than $10 trillion over the ten-year budget window, bringing the budget into balance in FY 2023. The RSC’s budget would repeal ObamaCare and enact other patient-centered health insurance reforms, make Social Security and Medicare solvent, and reform federal welfare programs. It also promotes free trade, regulatory reform, and other free market, limited government principles. The current text of H.Con.Res. 71 and the McClintock amendment include language that allows the House Ways and Means Committee to produce legislation to reform the tax code. Riddled with loopholes and special interest deductions, America’s tax code has become far too complex. According to the Tax Foundation, Americans spent 8.9 billion hours and $409 billion complying with the more than 74,000-page tax code.

No one disagrees with the need for assistance for areas recently impacted by disasters. Nevertheless, the concern with the Additional Supplement Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act is that Congress is spending money without any spending offsets. In fact, the manner by which the bill will be brought to the House floor for consideration prohibits amendments that could offset the $36.5 billion appropriated. Currently, the national debt is $20.4 trillion. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the projected budget deficit for FY 2017 and FY is $804 billion and $855 billion, respectively. Congress is only a few years away from the $1+ trillion deficits that Republicans frequently and rightly criticized under President Barack Obama. Long-term projections are even more ominous from a budgetary perspective. Sadly, Congress is once again avoiding difficult choices at the expense of future generations.

The budget resolution contains reconciliation instructions that allow the House Ways and Means Committee to produce legislation for fundamental tax reform. It has been more than 30 years since Congress passed fundamental tax reform. Since that time, the tax code has become riddled with carve-outs that benefit politically connected special interests. Today, there are more than 74,000 pages in the tax code. According to the Tax Foundation, Americans spent 8.9 billion hours and $409 billion on tax compliance in 2016. Congress has a generational opportunity to reform the tax code by consolidating and lowering tax rates, broadening the tax base, and promoting job creation and international competitiveness for American businesses. This will make the tax code fairer and simplify the filing process, allowing the vast majority of Americans to file their taxes on a postcard.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act lowers individual rates for the vast majority of taxpayers. In addition, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act nearly doubles the standard deduction, meaning Americans keep more of their hard-earned money, and doubles the child tax credit from $1,000 to $2,000. This bill also provides relief by doubling the exemption amount from the unfair death tax. Pass-through business owners, who file their taxes on their individual tax return, will be able to take a 20 percent deduction. This lowers the tax burden currently faced by pass-through businesses, which, according to the Tax Foundation, employ 70 million people, and promotes fairness. America’s business community will also see added growth as a result of the policy changes in this bill. The corporate tax rate will be lowered substantially from 35 percent to 21 percent, making American businesses more globally competitive and allowing them the resources they need to innovate and create jobs. It also eliminates confusion and complexity so job creators can focus on building their company and hiring working Americans. This bill also repeals the harmful ObamaCare individual mandate, a coercive tax on Americans. It’s estimated that 80 percent of households subject to this tax earn less than $50,000 per year. This is an unnecessary hardship being placed on working Americans. The federal government should not punish individuals who cannot afford ObamaCare’s costly health insurance plans or decide it is not the best course for them.

House Republicans have long championed fiscal responsibility and opposed deficit spending. Unfortunately, this measure runs contrary to both of those promises, and would have devastating effects to our economy. Additionally, there is little accountability to ensure that the funds appropriated will be effectively used. The bill provides a staggering $81 billion dollars for disaster relief with absolutely no offsetting cuts in other areas. This is the largest request for a single disaster relief package in United States history. Congress must make corresponding, necessary cuts to ensure that if this relief package is necessary, our economy is not adversely impacted as a result. In addition, this amount of money is excessive and wasteful. It is nearly double the $44 billion that the White House initially requested. It is also substantially larger than each of the standalone disaster relief packages that were passed after Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, $60 billion and $50.6 billion, respectively. This is not to mention that this new disaster relief bill comes in addition to the $52 billion already spent this year on Hurricanes Irma, Maria, and on wildfire relief.