House Minority Leader Blake A. Filippi: LC00125913

I thank Representative Place for this intelligent amendment, and I thank Leader Blaszewski for supporting the arguments for it. The reason that I believe Leader Blaszewski supported the arguments for it is that core to the APA is acquiring information and the regulatory body exercising its discretion as to whether to adopt a regulation or not. That first line on page 2, line 33, the must do so, which is must adopt a regulation as put forth in the plan, that essentially has usurped any discretion that the underlying regulatory agency has to determine whether the regulation makes sense or not. It makes them look at maybe vulnerable populations, traditionally they would be able to, and say this doesn't make sense for certain vulnerable populations, this doesn't make sense from economic perspective, or maybe the rule just plain doesn't make sense. I think what this amendment does, it once again exposes the overlying problems with this bill, is that we just take away discretion at every point along the way. We tell the ECCCC you have to create a plan, and they have no discretion to say there's no economically viable way to create this plan. We have to produce it, even if we hate it, even if it costs Rhode Islanders billions and billions of dollars and impoverishes them. I don't know at the time that the circumstances would impoverish the state, but I don't want to take that discretion away from anyone in the rulemaking process to say this is an unreasonable regulation. I think the underlying administrative agencies who are professionals, who have staffs, who are appointed, who have a fiduciary duty to look out for the citizens of Rhode Island should be able to exercise their APA rulemaking authority, which involves them doing economic analyses, looking at the effect of the regulation. The way this bill is drafted, it usurps that traditional APA rulemaking authority and has a theater APA proceeding. You must adopt the rule. No choice. You must adopt the rule, but go ahead and have your little APA proceeding. Put out notice. Take some public testimony, but we usurp any discretion that those administrative agencies have to say whether the regulation makes sense or not. There's got to be a point where there's an off-ramp, Mr. Speaker. There's got to be a point where we say we're not going to institute this plan. The ECCCC doesn't have an off-ramp. They have to produce a plan, even if they hate it. The way the bill is drafted, the regulatory agency who is in charge with enforcing that plan, adopting regulation, has no way to say we can't adopt this regulation. We have to adopt this regulation, even though we don't want it, even though we think it is harmful to Rhode Islanders. This produces some type of off-ramp, some type of discretion to say that this is not in Rhode Islanders' interests. We're going to take a pause. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.