This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
CHAIRMAN: Daniel D. Janka President MAG Industrial Automation Systems Americas Group 1st VICE CHAIRMAN: Eugene R. Haffely, Jr. Chief Operating Officer Assembly & Test Worldwide, Inc. 2nd VICE CHAIRMAN & TREASURER: Timothy B. Dining President & C.E.O. Greenerd Press & Machine Company, Inc. SECRETARY: Kim W. Beck President & C.E.O. Automatic Feed Co. DIRECTORS: Charles N. Clark, Sr. Division President Dukane Corp. – I.A.S. Division Krestine Corbin Chairman, President & C.E.O. Sierra Machinery, Inc. R. Stephen Flynn President Optical Gaging Products, Inc. Michael Powell President Master WorkHolding, Inc. Carl Reed President & C.E.O. Abbott Workholding Products Richard A. Shore, Sr. President Automation & Modular Components, Inc. Steven R. Stokey Executive Vice President Allied Machine & Engineering Corp. EX-OFFICIO: Ronald F. Schildge President Eitel Presses, Inc. Doug Currie President & C.E.O. Erie Press Systems STAFF: Douglas K. Woods President Peter R. Eelman Vice President-Exhibitions & Communications Patrick W. McGibbon Vice President-Strategic Information & Research Linda G. Montfort Vice President-Finance & Human Resources Christine T. Rasul Vice President-Meetings & Conferences Jeffery H. Traver Vice President-Business Development Paul R. Warndorf Vice President-Technology
The Honorable Darrell Issa The United States House of Representatives 2347 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing on behalf of AMT – The Association For Manufacturing Technology in reply to your letter dated December 10, 2010. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the impact of over burdensome regulations on U.S. manufacturers, particularly our smaller companies. Excessive regulations hinder job growth and innovation – key drivers of a prosperous economy. Reining in regulatory costs along with bringing down the structural costs that put U.S. companies at a competitive disadvantage is a guiding principle of AMT’s Manufacturing Mandate, a copy of which I am pleased to include with this letter. AMT represents U.S.-based manufacturing technology companies. Our members provide the tools that enable production of all manufactured goods. In their workplaces and in their products, safety and efficiency are critical elements of the manufacturing process. AMT members value the role our government plays in providing standards for each. Unfortunately, in many cases, regulations are excessive, confusing and so costly that R&D and business development suffer as a result, hindering job growth and stifling innovation. This is particularly true with regulations originating from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), where it is obvious that regulators know little or nothing about manufacturing. Our companies are not consulted for input, and the result is a convoluted set of regulations that make compliance increasingly difficult and costly. In some cases, industry has more input on European Union regulations than on the EPA’s. Segments of the manufacturing technology industry must now even deal with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which drew the responsibility for regulating lasers. Today, every laser machine has to be registered with the FDA. Talk about bakers regulating the trains – this is the actual application of that old joke! The overwhelming majority of AMT members are small businesses and the regulatory burden is worst for them. According to a recent study by the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy, small manufacturers bear a disproportionate share of the high cost of government regulations. Yet, these companies are looked to as the innovators. They are the businesses that will discover safer, cleaner ways to make things. The government must take a more focused and deliberate approach in determining how best to implement and distribute the regulatory burden so that manufacturers, particularly small ones, are not competitively disadvantaged. Regulatory reform should be one part of a comprehensive national strategy to help revitalize and
7901 WESTPARK DRIVE, McLEAN, VIRGINIA 22102-4206 PHONE 703-893-2900 FAX 703-893-1151 E-MAIL AMT@AMTonline.org • www.IMTSNET.org
The Honorable Darrell Issa January 18, 2010 Page Two strengthen our manufacturing sector – a strategy focused on driving innovation and increasing competitiveness. AMT has been working to advance the principals of our Manufacturing Mandate as the place to begin. AMT’s Manufacturing Mandate calls for a coordinated federal manufacturing policy that: 1) incentivizes innovation and R&D in new products and manufacturing technologies; 2) assures the availability of capital; 3) increases global competitiveness; 4) minimizes structural cost burdens, including costly regulatory compliance; 5) enhances collaboration between government, industry, and academia; and 6) builds a better educated and trained “smart force.” The Mandate advocates three major policy objectives to achieve these six goals: 1. Reduce uncertainty and foster innovation – The slow recovery is fueling continued uneasiness over the future. A persistent fear that government will raise taxes and add to the regulatory burden of small manufacturers stifles investment. Retroactive and short-term extensions of incentives help in the very short-term, but not when developing a business plan even five years out. There is also a skilled worker shortage of critical proportion in our industry, at a time when so many Americans are unemployed. Congress and the Administration must come together to address these issues and turn the focus on restoring confidence and encouraging innovation. 2. Enhance coordination and cooperation among agencies/departments – The Manufacturing Mandate supports a consistent, cohesive approach to managing the government’s pro-manufacturing initiatives. Duplicate efforts, complicated bureaucracies, and unclear directives waste valuable federal dollars. The Mandate recommends establishing a central manufacturing policy structure within the Executive Branch to develop policy, focus research, and coordinate implementation of the manufacturing mandate strategies. 3. Utilize the existing infrastructure – In this time of strained budgets and high deficits, we must leverage the resources already in place to help accomplish our goals. Existing manufacturing technology communities of Manufacturing Extension Partnerships (MEPs)/economic development centers, manufacturing companies, and academic institutions are excellent places to start., schools and businesses working more closely together can maximize the effectiveness of MEPs, public/private R&D, federal and state technology funding and other government programs and services. Manufacturing technology communities – located across the country – are where innovation and job creation are most likely to occur. The 112th Congress has the responsibility of ensuring that a competitive manufacturing sector is at the top of our national agenda. Efforts to root out impediments to our success, such as this one by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, are necessary. I hope we can count on your support for all of the principles outlined in this Manufacturing Mandate. My staff and I welcome the opportunity to meet with you and/or your staff for a discussion of what Congress can do to move manufacturing to the top of our national agenda. Best regards,
Douglas K. Woods President Enclosure
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.