00:00Thank you very much, Chair Langford and Ranking Member Fetterman, and good afternoon to our witnesses.
00:05It's good to see all of you, and Ms. Dudley, I think I hear that we share a high school in common.
00:11We do indeed. I was a few years ahead of you, but yes.
00:15Well, it is nice to see another Lincoln-Sudbury graduate.
00:18So let me start with a question to you, Ms. Dudley, and it's really a follow-up on your opening testimony.
00:25Congress needs to work in a bipartisan way to ensure standards and rules are effective
00:30and allow government to work better and faster for taxpayers.
00:34In addition, Congress needs to make its intent clear when passing legislation
00:38so that federal agencies can effectively deliver government services.
00:43So you talked some about this, but you also referenced a little bit more detail.
00:47So what are the most effective steps Congress can take to ensure that the intent of Congress is clear
00:54and at the same time to really improve government efficiency as we go about this work?
01:00So one of the things that I stress in my written testimony is that there are different factors that go into good policy
01:07and that we have a tendency to say agencies should base a decision on the science or on the facts,
01:14but the facts alone often don't translate nicely into a policy decision, just isn't that neat.
01:19So understanding the different factors and being explicit about what the agency should consider,
01:26not necessarily how it should consider it, but how to think about the different tradeoffs involved.
01:34Congresswoman Schwartz, it's good to see you.
01:37You've highlighted that the Loper-Brite decision will strain Congress's capacity to draft laws
01:43with the level of specificity now required.
01:45How do we realistically build the capacity within Congress to draft laws
01:50with the kind of precision now expected by the courts?
01:54We do suggest in the report that first you could really continue this process.
02:05So thank you for having this hearing initially, but to create a bipartisan process
02:09to review what could be done and what you're willing to do.
02:12We've seen the House already hold a select committee on modernization of their rules and procedures.
02:20I think that goes a long way.
02:21You could do something similar.
02:23But it's important to make sure that you have some bipartisan efforts going forward.
02:28So we do suggest investing in staff and the expertise in staff so that we don't,
02:35while there's a lot of relying on the expertise in the agencies, but having more expertise.
02:40And so we suggest even a fund to be able to hire experts when you need to.
02:46We know some laws are very explicit and some are more general.
02:49So we need to figure out how you can be more explicit about the direction.
02:53And that could be by having more expertise here in the Senate and in the House
02:59and be able to work together on that.
03:00I think that makes a big difference.
03:02Well, thank you for that.
03:03And kind of a follow-up, I'm concerned that in the wake of Lope or Bright,
03:09we may see a retreat from evidence-based policymaking just at a time when I think we really need to be evidence-based.
03:17And I'm concerned we'll see it particularly in areas where Congress has historically relied on agency experts
03:23to apply the best available science and data.
03:26We know that some degree of agency flexibility is also essential for implementing laws effectively in complex and evolving areas.
03:34I mean, you can't always – a lot of these facts are not static, right,
03:39as we're addressing some of the most significant challenges we have.
03:43So in your view, how can Congress strike the right balance,
03:47drafting laws with enough specificity to withstand judicial scrutiny,
03:50while still allowing agencies to apply their expertise and respond to new evidence over time?
03:56Well, you have it exactly right, that getting that balance right is not something we always do.
04:00Now, you understand that sometimes we don't get specific because it makes it harder to pass legislation.
04:05And I've been in both situations where we got very explicit, as in the ACA,
04:10and in others where we've seen it more general.
04:12So I guess I would say it's always going to be a balance.
04:15But I think the more we can understand what those choices are and to guide that choice, you know,
04:22but not necessarily all the details of that choice.
04:25Because you don't – and I think we need more reporting back from the agencies if they're struggling here.
04:30You know, this conversation can happen during the regulatory process.
04:34And more accountability to check in and see how it's working a year or two later.
04:39We've done that.
04:40We modify laws all the time because our experience has told us we need to.
04:46But they have to come back to – you have to come back to you.
04:49They have to come back to the Senate and the House.
04:50They can't just decide on their own.
04:53And honestly, we're seeing a whole lot of expression by the executive branch of, I think, getting way over their skis on this.
05:01And to exert the power of the Senate and the House to make these laws.
05:07If they want to see it done really differently, they need to come back and say,
05:11you've got to change the law to let us do it.
05:14I think that is a way to demand that kind of – and exert the power of the House and the Senate
05:19to actually make the laws and to help in the interpretation of those laws as well.
05:23So one of the things that I'm hearing you say, among others, or a couple of the things,
05:29is that we really need to be articulating goals and metrics within legislation where that applies.
05:36That's right.
05:37And I think there's nothing wrong with actually asking for data.
05:40And I think Susan's going to talk about this maybe.
05:42But evidence – you know, you can create evidence any way you want.
05:46So not that I don't believe there isn't fact.
05:49I do.
05:50But we're in an era right now where there's so much misinformation and misunderstanding about facts
05:55that we need to be clear about what we – what you intend.
05:59Sorry, it's not we anymore, but you intend.
06:01And to have that kind of back and forth and understanding.
06:05Ms. Dudley, you wanted to –
06:06Just a quick reinforcement of what you both just said.
06:09We have a lot of challenges that are evolving.
06:11And we have to design both laws and the regulations with learning in mind
06:16so that we can learn, test, evaluate, and then revise and revisit.
06:21Right.
06:22So I –
06:22I appreciate you both.
06:24Thank you very much.
06:25Thanks.
06:27Senator Fetterman, do you have additional questions you want to be able to ask right now?
06:30I just – it's more of a quick one.
06:32Yeah.
Comments