House closer to requiring more oversight of SEC regulations

"It is a common-sense solution to preventing unnecessary and overly burdensome government regulation," said Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who chairs the House Rules Committee.

ADVERTISEMENT
"It requires the SEC to perform a cost-benefit analysis before finalizing any major rule. It also prevents the implementation of the rule if the benefits do not outweigh the costs."

The vote on the rule followed several Democratic complaints that the GOP bill is aimed at hamstringing the SEC, and preventing it from regulating Wall Street under the Dodd-Frank reform law.

"The SEC already does cost-benefit analyses on these rules and regulations. It is already happening," Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said. "So what's the real purpose of this bill?

"This bill is really about putting more burdens on the SEC as they're attempting to fulfill their mandates under Dodd-Frank and do their job to protect investors."

But Republicans responded by saying the SEC has already agreed to enhanced cost-benefit analysis of its rules.

"We thought … after testimony, in meetings, in feedback, thought the SEC actually agreed with this," Sessions said. "We simply put it into something they ought to be doing on a regular basis."

Democrats spent much of the debate arguing that consideration of the SEC bill shows Republicans are ignoring larger concerns, such as job creation. Democrats also spent several minutes during the debate calling on the House once again to agree to a budget conference with the Senate.

Sessions accused Democrats of changing the subject, and argued that House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and Senate Budget Committee Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) are trying to work out the outlines of an agreement first before starting a budget conference. But he said this is proving difficult given the large differences between the House and Senate budgets.