-9999

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. LEE. Mr. President, if the nanny state had a mascot, it would be the Federal Trade Commission. In fact, back in the 1970s, the FTC earned the nickname the ``National Nanny''--this, after it went on a rulemaking binge, one that triggered an unprecedented congressional response.

In response to that binge, Congress defunded the Agency for several days. In fact, it refused formally to reauthorize the Commission for some 14 years after that. Thankfully, the FTC changed approach by reining in its rulemaking initiatives. Congress, however, did not learn its lesson and has continued to grant the FTC broad powers over the years. These grants of power and the lack of congressional will have helped put the FTC on a trajectory that looks eerily similar to its ``National Nanny'' era.

Under the leadership of Lina Khan, the FTC has only accelerated into this trajectory and is now being transformed into a bigger and more invasive national nanny than ever could have been imagined in the 1970s. Her vision is to transform what is an enforcement Agency into a broader, largely independent regulatory Agency. This move would reduce the congressional oversight of key economic regulation and would also have serious negative implications for countless businesses across the Nation that could find themselves subject to the whims of an unelected, arbitrary, capricious, out-of-control Agency. The FTC is on course to take significant new powers so that it can use its already broad authorities under section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and elsewhere to regulate huge swaths of the American economy.

We, accordingly, need to be very careful when considering nominees to the Commission.

As a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, I took seriously my consideration of Mr. Bedoya's nomination and spoke with him on multiple occasions regarding his nomination and regarding his vision for the Federal Trade Commission. During his nomination hearing, I took careful note of my questions to Mr. Bedoya and to his responses to ascertain his vision for the Commission and his view on the scope of the FTC's power. His answers did little to calm my concerns. In fact, they did much to add to my worries, not only about his nomination but about the future of the Commission at large.

During my questioning, Mr. Bedoya signaled that he would use section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to conduct unfair methods of competition rulemaking. That, of course, would be a dangerous expansion of the FTC's rulemaking power, one that would occur without a congressional grant of authority.

He refused to share his views on the FTC's repeal of its vertical merger guidelines.

He didn't answer when I asked about his views on Lina Khan's use of zombie votes, or proxy votes, of ex-commissioners after they had left the Commission.

He would not provide a clear answer on whether he supported Lina Khan's decision to remove key procedural requirements attached to FTC rulemaking--the very statutory, procedural requirements that were instituted in direct response to the Agency's flagrant abuses of its own power in the 1970s.

And he openly supports Lina Khan's decision to close out the voice of minority commissioners to approve investigations--an action that has destroyed a bipartisan hallmark of the Commission.

Mr. Bedoya did not earn my confidence in his hearing. His nomination is not designed to strengthen American business or bolster our economy. Instead, his nomination will give the Commission the majority it needs to take American economic regulation out of the hands of elected lawmakers.

We have to remember that the very first clause of the very first section of the very first article of the Constitution says that all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in the Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives. In other words, all Federal lawmaking power-- legislative powers or lawmaking powers--the power to make Federal law as articulated in article I, section I, clause 1--is vested in Congress, not in an outside Agency.

Article I, section VII puts even more clarity on it in explaining that, in order to pass a Federal law, you have got to have passage by the Senate and passage by the House of the same piece of legislation, followed by presentment to the President, resulting in signature, veto, or acquiescence. Without that, you cannot make a Federal law.

When we pretend to make Federal lawmakers outside of Congress, we have got to be very careful because this is subversive of the entire purpose of the Constitution, putting in the most dangerous power--the power to make prescriptive laws, the power to make laws adding to, altering, materially changing the obligations of members of the public. You have got to go through the branch of government that is most accountable to the people at the most regular intervals.

That is why this is so concerning that you have in Mr. Bedoya, like you have in Lina Khan, someone who doesn't fear this type of unaccountable, de facto lawmaking, not only outside of what the Constitution can countenance fairly but also outside of basic standards of accountability and good government.

For all of these reasons, I fear that Mr. Bedoya will not only enable but will support the blatant attempts made by Lina Khan to return the FTC to its status as the ``National Nanny'' and, ultimately, the national enemy.

Under her leadership, the FTC has shown disregard for the input of minority commissioners and has been frustrated by the legal limits surrounding the FTC's authority. Lina Khan is not afraid to lead the Agency on a path that ignores legal, constitutional, and procedural roadblocks in its way.

I am committed to reversing the dangerous trajectory of the FTC; to making sure that we don't return to the 1970s era of the FTC's being the nanny of the nanny state; and to making sure that we restore the FTC's accountability to Congress and, ultimately, to the people.

We have to remember that true accountability in our system of government--accountability related to what the law is and how the law is written--always has to be with Congress. That is why article I is written the way that it is. It is why this is something that has to be understood appropriately as a nondelegable duty--that is, the power to make law.

We have got to restore that accountability, and I fear that Mr. Bedoya will only further enable the radical takeover of the Federal Trade Commission. I, therefore, cannot and will not support his nomination.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source