CONYERS Joins Terri Sewell For The Celebration Of The Birmingham Civil Rights National Monument

Glad to join Terri A. Sewell for this celebration of the Birmingham #CivilRights National Monument. We must do everything in our power to protect African American history & culture!

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Ryan Calls Ferguson Painting ‘Disgusting’

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan is siding with his party and wants the painting of police-community relations in Ferguson, Missouri, that depicts police officers and others as animals to be taken down.

“This is disgusting and it’s not befitting the Capitol,” Ryan said Thursday on “The Mike Gallagher Show,” adding that “this isn’t a question of First Amendment rights.”

Missouri Democratic Rep. William Lacy Clay, who sponsored the painting and has consistently fought for it, fired back.

- See more at: http://www.rollcall.com/news/hoh/speaker-ryan-calls-ferguson-painting-disgusting#sthash.XZSTPBZ0.dpuf


Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & CUMMINGS APPLAUD INSPECTOR GENERAL INVESTIGATION OF FBI ACTIONS BEFORE 2016 ELECTION

Washington, D.C. - Today, Reps. John Conyers, Jr. and Elijah E. Cummings, the Ranking Members of the House Committees on Judiciary and Oversight and Government Reform, released the following statement after the U.S. Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced they will conduct an immediate investigation into the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) actions before the 2016 election:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Our citizens must be able to trust that the FBI, our chief federal law enforcement agency, is non-partisan and does not insert itself into the electoral process.  We are pleased that the Inspector General is following up on our request to investigate and review these allegations and look forward to receiving a full review of these matters.” 

On November 4, 2016, Conyers and Cummings wrote to the DOJ Inspector General asking that they launch an investigation to determine the source of multiple unauthorized—and often inaccurate—leaks from within the FBI to benefit the presidential campaign of Donald Trump. You can view the letter here.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Read the Scathing 1986 Letter Coretta Scott King Wrote Opposing Sessions’ Federal Nomination

Coretta Scott King’s nine-page letter blasted Jeff Sessions' nomination to be a federal judge, saying that the then-U.S. attorney’s “politically-motivated voting-fraud prosecutions to his indifference toward criminal violations of civil rights law, indicates that he lacks the temperament, fairness and judgment to be a federal judge.”

Coretta Scott King Letter and Testimony on Nomination of Jeff Sessions 1986 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

http://www.theroot.com/articles/news/2017/01/read-the-scathing-1986-letter-coretta-scott-king-wrote-opposing-jeff-sessions-federal-nomination/

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS & JOHNSON RELEASE STATEMENTS & JUDICIARY DEM FACT SHEET ON GOP ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA & WISH LIST FOR BIG BUSINESS

Washington, DC – During the first weeks of the 115^th Congress, Republicans are choosing to prioritize a series of anti-regulation bills that would empower Republicans to strip critical protections away from Americans. H.R. 5, the so-called Regulatory Accountability Act, would grind the rulemaking system to a halt while inviting regulatory capture through increased input from corporate interests, waste agency resources and taxpayer dollars, and do nothing to directly help small businesses. In doing so, H.R. 5 would seriously undermine critical protections across every regulated industry, including consumers’ health and product safety, environmental protections, workplace safety, and consumer financial protections.

House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-MI) and Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law Ranking Member Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (D-GA) today released the following statements:

  

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“Instead of wasting time on bad solutions for non-existent problems, we should be working tirelessly across party lines to find solutions to crushing student loan debt, gun violence, unemployment and stagnant wages,” said Conyers. “Unfortunately, House Republicans refuse to work on a bipartisan basis to reduce barriers to employment, even in the context of their anti-regulatory legislation. These same Republicans also refuse to work with Democrats on commonsense amendments to their legislation that would ensure that protections that create jobs and ensure the safety of our food, water and air are not undermined.”

Conyers continued, “Instead of working to support corporate interests through the GOP anti-regulatory agenda, Congress must focus on finding real solutions to real problems facing the nation, such as middle-class economic opportunity, gun violence prevention, the erosion of voting rights, and growing economic inequality.” 

“Once again, House Republicans' only ideas for growing the economy and creating jobs is to endanger countless regulatory protections under the guise of a so-called ‘jobs bill.’ They choose to ignore the fact that 15.6 million private sector jobs were created under the robust regulatory environment under the Obama administration,” said Johnson. “According to a recent Bloomberg report, only 0.3 percent of jobs eliminated last year were due to government regulation, far less than those lost due to other factors such as outsourcing and automation.”

On the House Judiciary Committee alone, House Republicans have held 33 anti-regulation hearings since the start of the 112th Congress, but not a single hearing in the 114^th or 115^thCongress on:

• Gun violence;
• Voting rights;
• The impact of overwhelming student loan debt on families and the economy;
• The mortgage foreclosure crisis, which still is hampering the economic recovery of millions of American families; or
• How we can better help struggling American families regain their financial stability.

A full fact sheet on H.R. 5 and the GOP Big Business Agenda is below.

FACT SHEET: GOP’S ANTI-REGULATORY AGENDA IS ONLY A “BETTER WAY” FOR BIG BUSINESS, NOT WORKING AMERICANS by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS Floor Statement In Opposition To The So-Called "Regulatory Accountability Act 2017

OPENING STATEMENT

I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 5, the “Regulatory Accountability Act.”

           

Under the guise of improving the regulatory process, H.R. 5 will, in truth, undermine that process and jeopardize the ability of government agencies to safeguard public health and safety, the environment, workplace safety, and consumer financial protections. 

The ways in which this legislation accomplishes this result are almost too numerous to list here, but I will mention a few. 

For example, title I of the bill would impose more than 70 new analytical requirements that will add years to the rulemaking process. 

Worse yet, many of these new requirements are intended to facilitate the ability of regulated entities -- such as well-funded corporate interests -- to intervene and derail regulatory protections they oppose. 

And, it would function as a “super mandate,” overriding critical laws that Congress specifically intended to prohibit agencies from considering costs when American lives are at stake. 

Additionally, the bill creates numerous procedural hurdles in the rulemaking process, further endangering American lives through years of delay and increasing the likelihood of regulatory capture. 

For example, H.R. 5 dramatically expands the use of formal rulemaking, a time- and resource-intensive process, requiring formal trial-like hearings for certain rules.

Formal rulemaking has long been roundly rejected for good cause as being excessively costly and ill-suited for complex policy issues. 

The Administrative Section of the American Bar Association noted that “these provisions run directly contrary to a virtual consensus in the administrative law community that the Administrative Procedure Act formal rulemaking procedure is obsolete.” 

I am also concerned that H.R. 5 would impose an arbitrary one-size-fits-all 6-month delay on virtually every new rule.

Specifically, title V of the bill will prohibit agency rules from becoming effective until the information required by the bill has been available online for 6 months, with only limited exception. 

Clearly, H.R. 5 fails to take into account a vast array of time-sensitive rules ranging from the mundane -- such as the frequent U.S. Coast Guard bridge closings regulations -- to those that protect public health and safety, such as forthcoming updates to the Lead and Copper Rule by the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce lead in public drinking water.

Finally, title II of H.R. 5 would eliminate judicial deference to agencies and require federal courts to review all agency rulemakings and interpretations of statutes on a de novo basis.

The unfortunate result of this requirement is that the bill would empower a generalist court to override the determinations of agency experts, regardless of the judge’s technical knowledge and understanding of the underlying subject matter.

By eliminating any deference to agencies, H.R. 5 would force agencies to adopt even moredetailed factual records and explanations, which would further delay the finalization of critical life-saving regulatory protections.

The Supreme Court has recognized that federal courts simply lack the subject-matter expertise of agencies, are politically unaccountable, and should not engage in making substantive determinations from the bench.

It is ironic that those who have long decried “judicial activism” now support facilitating a greater role for the judiciary in agency rulemaking.

These are just a few of the many serious concerns presented by H.R. 5 and, accordingly, I urge my colleagues to oppose this dangerous legislation and I reserve the balance of my time.

CLOSING REMARKS

I oppose H.R. 5 because it is based on the faulty premise that environmental and public safety protections kill jobs, result in economically stifling costs, and promote uncertainty.

This bill would not create a single job.  During the series of hearings and markups held on this anti-regulatory legislation in previous congresses, not one shred of evidence emerged indicating that this bill would create jobs.

To the contrary, the Majority’s own witness, Christopher DeMuth, appearing on behalf of the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute, debunked this argument, stating that focusing on jobs “can lead to confusion in regulatory debates” and that the employment effects of regulatory protections “are indeterminate.”

In sharp contrast to the misguided approach of H.R. 5, regulatory protections that ensure the safety of American-made products unquestionably foster job creation and protect the competitiveness of our businesses in the global marketplace. 

This explains why more than 150 organizations strongly oppose this dangerous legislation, including:

·                     Americans for Financial Reform

·                     The American Lung Association

·                     Consumers Union

·                     The Humane Society of the United States

·                     The League of Conservation Voters

·                     Public Citizen

·                     The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees

·                     Earthjustice

·                     The Coalition for Sensible Safeguards

·                     The American Public Health Association

·                     The Environmental Defense Action Fund

·                     The Center for American Progress, and

·                     The Trust for America’s Health.

The American people deserve better than H.R. 5. 

We need legislation that creates middle class financial security and opportunity.

           

We need sensible regulations that protect American families from economic ruin and that bring predatory financial practices to an end.

We need workplace safety protections that ensure hardworking Americans who go to work each day without having to risk their lives as a result of hazardous work environments.

Unfortunately, H.R. 5 does nothing to advance any of these critical goals. 

I must therefore oppose H.R. 5 and I yield back the balance of my time.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

CONYERS STATEMENT ON GRASSLEY TREATMENT OF CBC MEMBERS TESTIFYING AT SESSIONS HEARING TODAY

Washington, DC – Today, U.S. Senator Cory Booker, civil rights icon Congressman John Lewis and Congressional Black Caucus Chair Congressman Cedric Richmond will testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in opposition to Senator Jeff Sessions’ nomination for U.S. Attorney General. These Members are being required to testify as part of a third joint panel with non-Members of Congress and must sit through the hearing until the panel starts. After calling Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley yesterday, House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr., the current longest serving Member of Congress and co-founder of the Congressional Black Caucus, today issued the following statement in regards to the lack of courtesy typically afforded to Members of Congress who testify at hearings:

Dean of the U.S. House
of Representatives
John Conyers, Jr.

“As the Dean of the House, former Committee Chairman and a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus, I reject the lack of comity and respect afforded to my Congressional Black Caucus colleagues who will testify in opposition to Senator Sessions during his confirmation hearing. Booker, Lewis and Richmond are being required to testify with non-Members of Congress, and remain seated during the hearing for an indefinite period of time before offering their testimony during the last panel of the hearing. 

“In the past, both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees have had a relationship based upon mutual respect and courtesy. What is set to take place today strongly deviates from the high level of cooperation we’ve always bestowed one another as colleagues in the United States Congress. I urge Chairman Grassley to reconsider the tone he is setting from this moment forward. As very busy Members of Congress with packed schedules, I believe Senator Booker, and Representatives Lewis and Richmond should have been able to provide their testimony on a member-only panel at the start of the hearing.”

Testimony begins at 3:38:24 Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©