8 September 1998 Source: Excerpted from Senate Report 105-299 See full report: http://jya.com/sr105-299.txt See S.389: http://jya.com/s389rs.txt ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 105th Congress Report SENATE 2d Session 105-299 _______________________________________________________________________ MANDATES INFORMATION ACT OF 1998 __________ R E P O R T of the COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE together with MINORITY VIEWS to accompany S. 389 [Snip] TABLE 3.--REPORTED BILLS WITH PRIVATE-SECTOR MANDATES THAT EXCEED THE STATUTORY THRESHOLD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Were Estimated annual indirect Topic Mandate Bill Number(s) costs (billions of effects dollars) considered ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Encryption.................... Allow decryption..... H.R. 695............. 0.2 to 2.0........... Yes. [Snip] CBO noted that, particularly for private sector mandates, estimates occasionally could not be made at all or made only on crude assumptions because costs would be affected by specific implementing rules developed after the proposed reform was enacted. For instance, as CBO Deputy Director James Blum explained to this Committee in June, because CBO could not determine what technical and functional regulatory requirements would be established for an encryption bill reported in the House, its cost estimate ranged from $200 million to $2 billion. Similarly, CBO cited examples of its inability to obtain reliable data in preparing its estimates because information in some circumstances simply does not exist. [Snip] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Congressional Record: June 3, 1998 (Digest)] [Page D578] MANDATES INFORMATION ACT Committee on Governmental Affairs: Committee concluded hearings on S. 389 and H.R. 3534, bills to improve congressional deliberation on proposed Federal private sector mandates, after receiving testimony from Senator Abraham; Representative Portman; James L. Blum, Deputy Director, Congressional Budget Office; Mary Ann Cricchio, Baltimore, Maryland, on behalf of the National Restaurant Association; and R. Bruce Josten, United States Chamber of Commerce, and Sharon Buccino, Natural Resources Defense Council, both of Washington, D.C. -------------------------------------------------------------------------