Overview
Title
To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide that major rules of the executive branch shall have no force or effect unless a joint resolution of approval is enacted into law.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to make sure that big new rules from the government only happen if Congress says it's okay, so that everyone gets a chance to talk about them and make sure they're fair and good for everybody.
Summary AI
H.R. 9648, also known as the "Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2024" (REINS Act), proposes changes to how major rules issued by executive branch agencies can take effect. Under this bill, a major rule cannot be enforced unless Congress approves it through a joint resolution. The bill is designed to enhance accountability and transparency in the federal regulatory process, ensuring that significant regulations have legislative backing.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled "Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2024" seeks to amend Chapter 8 of Title 5 in the United States Code. The central premise of the bill is to increase accountability and transparency in the federal regulatory process. It requires that major rules from executive agencies must receive congressional approval before taking effect. This legislative step is meant to shift some regulatory oversight responsibilities back to Congress, ensuring that elected representatives have a say in rules that may significantly impact the economy, public policy, or society at large.
Significant Issues
Several issues are highlighted in the bill that warrant consideration. Section 805 exempts many agency actions from judicial review, which could lead to unchecked power, potentially bypassing essential checks and balances. This exemption may restrict the public's ability to challenge or review legislative actions, negatively impacting transparency and accountability.
In Section 801, while major rules need congressional approval, the provision that allows the President to temporarily enact these rules for 90 days on broad grounds like national security may lead to misuse. Limitations on requiring congressional approval are crucial to safeguarding democratic processes and ensuring that significant changes are under proper oversight.
Section 810 provides criteria for bypassing standard rulemaking procedures that are vague and open to interpretation. This vagueness can lead agencies to exercise considerable discretion in rule implementation, reducing transparency and accountability in the process.
Moreover, Section 814 mandates a regular review of rules, requiring at least 10% of eligible rules to be reviewed annually over a ten-year cycle. This requirement might overwhelm agencies, consuming resources that could detract from necessary regulatory updates and enforcement.
Public Impact
For the broader public, this bill aims to bring major executive rules under the scrutiny of Congress, potentially offering more democratic oversight of significant regulatory actions. However, the limitation on judicial review and possible presidential override can lead to situations where rules affecting public welfare may not face sufficient accountability or challenges. There might be a longer delay in rule implementation due to the requirement of additional congressional approval, which could hinder timely responses to urgent issues.
Impact on Stakeholders
For legislators, the bill arguably enhances their role in the legislative process, restoring authority that might have been delegated to executive agencies over the years. This shift may help ensure that the rules governing public policy reflect elected representatives' perspectives.
Conversely, executive agencies could find their regulatory capabilities hampered. They may face potential hurdles in enacting new rules due to increased oversight and approval requirements. This may lead to a slower regulatory process, impacting the agility needed to adapt to emerging issues or technologies.
Businesses and interest groups might find the clearer accountability pathway creates more predictable regulatory environments. However, they might also face increased lobbying as rules become more subject to political processes rather than expert agency decisions.
In conclusion, while the "Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2024" seeks to promote accountability by involving Congress more directly in rule-making, it risks introducing delays, potential misuse of exemptions, and places a significant burden on agencies—issues that must be carefully weighed against potential benefits in governmental transparency.
Financial Assessment
The proposed legislation, known as the "Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2024" or REINS Act, includes multiple references to financial criteria which play a critical role in the regulatory process.
Financial Threshold for Major Rules
A significant financial reference in the bill is the classification of a "major rule," which includes any rule that has an anticipated annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more. This threshold is crucial for defining which rules require closer scrutiny and congressional approval. The implication here is that any regulation forecasted to have a substantial economic impact, measured by this $100 million benchmark, must undergo additional legislative oversight.
Significant Guidance Documents
Similarly, the bill outlines that a "significant guidance document" is similarly defined by its potential to have an annual economic effect of $100,000,000 or more. This clear financial threshold is significant because it categorizes guidance with serious economic implications similarly to major rules, thus subjecting it to a structured oversight process.
Implications of Financial References
The choice of an economic impact threshold, specifically the $100 million criterion, underscores the bill's focus on ensuring that only regulations or guidance with substantial economic consequences are subject to additional layers of legislative scrutiny. However, this financial criterion can also pose challenges, as highlighted in Section 3 of the bill. The complexity in distinguishing between major and nonmajor rules, combined with the specific monetary cutoffs, could lead to confusion or misinterpretation, requiring careful cross-reference by stakeholders to ensure compliance and understanding.
Budgetary Effects and Economic Considerations
Section 4 of the bill ties into the financial implications by clarifying the budgetary effects of rules subject to congressional review. It states that any rule affecting budget authority, outlays, or receipts is to be assumed effective unless not approved under section 802. This essentially means that the financial impact of rules must be considered and deemed safe from automatic assumption unless congressionally disapproved, contributing to the bill's emphasis on fiscal responsibility and oversight.
Concerns and Administrative Burden
The bill, by setting financial thresholds for what constitutes a significant action or major rule, brings to light concerns about the administrative burdens these stipulations might create. Section 811 discusses the mandate for agencies to compile detailed regulatory plans, potentially imposing heavy administrative workloads, especially when finances are tightly scrutinized against these economic impacts. Agencies must balance their regulatory actions within the constraints of these financial guidelines, which can be resource-intensive and affect their ability to focus on other critical tasks.
In essence, the REINS Act strategically uses financial benchmarks to delineate the scope of congressional oversight required for executive branch regulations, emphasizing the minimization of economic disruption while holding agencies accountable for the fiscal impacts of their actions.
Issues
Section 805: The complete exemption of determinations, findings, actions, or omissions under the chapter from judicial review could lead to unchecked governmental power, eliminating necessary checks and balances in the regulatory process.
Section 801: The process requires that major rules gain congressional approval via a joint resolution, but the potential for presidential determination to allow rules to take effect for 90 days without congressional approval is susceptible to abuse, particularly given the broad justifications such as national security and international trade agreements.
Section 810: The vaguely defined criteria for when rules can bypass the notice and public procedure requirements, such as the terms 'impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest,' could allow Federal agencies excessive discretion, reducing transparency and accountability.
Section 814: The annual review requirement for at least 10 percent of eligible rules could overwhelm agencies, draining resources and potentially leading to inefficient regulatory management.
Section 3: The distinctions between major and nonmajor rules and their respective procedures are complex and spread out through multiple subsections, potentially leading to confusion and misinterpretation, requiring careful cross-reference.
Section 2: The language describing excessive delegation of congressional powers lacks clear definitions or criteria, introducing subjectivity and potential ambiguity in determining what constitutes proper oversight and accountability.
Section 812: The exemption from publication of guidance documents based on Freedom of Information Act exemptions limits transparency and could allow agencies to broadly interpret these exemptions, hindering public access to information.
Section 811: The mandate for agencies to submit detailed regulatory action plans at set intervals could impose significant administrative burdens, potentially diverting focus from more critical tasks and causing inefficiencies.
Section 808 and 809: Exemptions for monetary policy and deregulatory actions lack clear justification or definition, which might lead to questions regarding accountability and the broad applications of these sections.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the Act specifies that it will be known as the “Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2024”.
2. Purpose Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The purpose of this Act is to ensure more responsibility and openness in the way federal regulations are created. It aims to have Congress vote on significant regulations to improve legislative precision, strengthen the regulatory process, and make lawmakers more accountable to the public for the laws they approve.
3. Congressional review of agency rulemaking Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congressional review of agency rulemaking involves a process where Federal agencies must submit rules to Congress for approval before they go into effect. Major rules need a joint resolution of approval from Congress, while nonmajor rules have a simpler process, and this review ensures transparency and oversight of the rules affecting public and economic policy.
Money References
- “(3) The term ‘major rule’— “(A) means any rule, including an interim final rule, that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget finds has resulted in or is likely to result in— “(i) an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; “(ii) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or “(iii) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets; “(B) includes any significant guidance document; and “(C) does not include any rule promulgated under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104; 110 Stat. 56) or the amendments made by that Act. “
- “(6) The term ‘significant guidance document’— “(A) means a guidance document disseminated to regulated entities or the general public that may reasonably be anticipated to— “(i) lead to an annual effect of $100,000,000 or more, or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, employment, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; “(ii) create a serious inconsistency, or otherwise interfere, with an action taken or planned by another agency; “(iii) materially alter the budgetary impact of any entitlement, grant, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights or obligations of recipients thereof; or “(iv) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates; and “(B) does not include any guidance document— “(i) on regulations issued in accordance with section 556 or 557 of this title; “(ii) that pertains to a military or foreign affairs function of the United States, other than procurement regulations and regulations involving the import or export of non-defense articles and services; “(iii) on regulations that are limited to the organization, management, or personnel matters of a Federal agency; or “(iv) belonging to a category of guidance documents exempted by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.
- (9) The term ‘significant regulatory action’ means any regulatory action, other than monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee, that is likely to— “(A) have an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; “(B) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; “(C) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or “(D) raise a novel legal or policy issue. “
801. Congressional review Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section describes the process for congressional review of new federal agency rules, requiring the agency to submit a report to Congress and the Comptroller General before a rule can take effect. It outlines the steps for the approval of major rules, including providing reports and analyses, requiring that major rules can't take effect without congressional approval, and under specific conditions, allows the President to temporarily implement a rule critical for health, safety, criminal enforcement, national security, or international trade.
802. Congressional approval procedure for major rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the process for Congress to approve major rules through joint resolutions. It describes how these resolutions should be introduced, debated, and voted on within specified time frames in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, ensuring expedited consideration without amendments.
803. Congressional disapproval procedure for nonmajor rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Congress has outlined a procedure in Section 803 for disapproving nonmajor rules using joint resolutions. These resolutions must be introduced within a specific timeframe, go through committees, and follow special rules in the Senate for debate and voting, including limits on amendments and debate time.
804. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, several important terms are defined: "Federal agency" refers to any agency as described in section 551(1); "guidance document" is a non-regulatory statement issued by a Federal agency to explain policy or interpretation on an issue; "major rule" includes those rules with significant economic impacts or consequences on various sectors, and specifically includes significant guidance documents while excluding certain telecommunications rules; "nonmajor rule" is any rule not classified as major; "rule" expands on section 551's definition, allowing for guidance documents, but excludes certain agency-specific or procedural rules; "significant guidance document" is a guidance document with substantial economic impacts or legal significance, exempting military functions and certain organizational documents; and "submission or publication date" for rules indicates when Congress receives required reports or when such rules are published in the Federal Register, depending on the rule's type.
Money References
- For purposes of this chapter: (1) The term “Federal agency” means any agency as that term is defined in section 551(1). (2) The term “guidance document” means a statement of general applicability and future effect, other than a regulatory action, issued by a Federal agency that sets forth— (A) a policy on a statutory, regulatory, or technical issue; or (B) an interpretation of a statutory or regulatory issue. (3) The term “major rule”— (A) means any rule, including an interim final rule, that the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget finds has resulted in or is likely to result in— (i) an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; (ii) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or (iii) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets; (B) includes any significant guidance document; and (C) does not include any rule promulgated under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–104; 110 Stat. 56) or the amendments made by that Act.
- (6) The term “significant guidance document”— (A) means a guidance document disseminated to regulated entities or the general public that may reasonably be anticipated to— (i) lead to an annual effect of $100,000,000 or more, or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, employment, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; (ii) create a serious inconsistency, or otherwise interfere, with an action taken or planned by another agency; (iii) materially alter the budgetary impact of any entitlement, grant, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights or obligations of recipients thereof; or (iv) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates; and (B) does not include any guidance document— (i) on regulations issued in accordance with section 556 or 557 of this title; (ii) that pertains to a military or foreign affairs function of the United States, other than procurement regulations and regulations involving the import or export of non-defense articles and services; (iii) on regulations that are limited to the organization, management, or personnel matters of a Federal agency; or (iv) belonging to a category of guidance documents exempted by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. (7) The term “submission or publication date”, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, means— (A) in the case of a major rule, the date on which the Congress receives the report submitted under section 801(a)(1); and (B) in the case of a nonmajor rule, the later of— (i) the date on which the Congress receives the report submitted under section 801(a)(1); and (ii) the date on which the nonmajor rule is published in the Federal Register, if so published. ---
805. Judicial review Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
According to SEC. 805 on judicial review, most decisions or actions made under this chapter cannot be reviewed by a court. However, the courts can check if a Federal agency has completed the necessary steps for a rule to become effective. Passing a joint resolution of approval by Congress doesn’t change the authority of a rule or affect any legal challenges to the rule's validity.
806. Affirmative defense Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
An affirmative defense is available to a defendant in a Federal agency or U.S. court if a reasonable person could not have predicted that their actions were illegal due to unclear legal language.
807. Private right of action Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
A person affected by a Federal agency's failure to follow the rules can sue in a U.S. district court for an order to stop the rule before it starts. Additionally, if someone can show they might be harmed by a rule, they can challenge the agency's decision if the rule is labeled as non-major and ask the court to either cancel the rule or declare it a major rule, requiring more stringent approval.
808. Exemption for monetary policy Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section states that the rules in this chapter do not apply to matters related to monetary policy that are suggested or carried out by the Federal Reserve or the Federal Open Market Committee.
809. Exemption for deregulatory actions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Sections 802 and 803 do not apply to rules labeled as deregulatory actions as noted in the Unified Agenda and Annual Regulatory Plan, following section 811.
810. Effective date of certain rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section states that certain rules about activities like hunting, fishing, or camping, and some less significant rules that must be issued quickly, can go into effect when decided by the relevant Federal agency. This is even if usual notice and public procedure requirements are skipped for good reasons.
811. Regulatory planning and budget Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines the process for regulatory planning and budgeting, defining key terms like agencies and regulatory actions. It mandates the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to publish a regulatory agenda twice a year, detailing upcoming regulatory and deregulatory actions, and sets rules for determining and managing the costs and benefits of these actions.
Money References
- means— (A) any regulation; and (B) any other regulatory guidance, statement of policy, information collection request, form, or reporting, recordkeeping, or disclosure requirements that imposes a burden on the public or governs agency operations. (9) The term “significant regulatory action” means any regulatory action, other than monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee, that is likely to— (A) have an annual effect on the economy of $100,000,000 or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; (B) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (C) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (D) raise a novel legal or policy issue. (10) The term “State” means each of the several States, the District of Columbia, and each territory or possession of the United States.
812. Publication of guidance documents on the internet Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text requires government agencies to publish all guidance documents, which are official statements that clarify policies or interpretations of laws, on a designated website for public access. Exceptions are made for documents exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, and procedures are outlined for maintaining and indicating when a document has been rescinded.
813. Expiration of rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Under this section, major rules made by an agency will expire 10 years after being enacted unless Congress passes a joint resolution to extend them. Additionally, the President can exempt one rule per Congress from this expiration for up to 30 days if it's necessary for health, safety, criminal law enforcement, national security, or international trade agreements.
814. Review of rules in effect Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines a process for agencies to regularly review and report on significant rules, with at least 10% of these rules reviewed annually over a 10-year period. After 10 years, if Congress hasn't approved a rule, it won't continue in effect, and there are specific procedures for how these rules should be approved or amended by Congress.
4. Budgetary effects of rules subject to section 802 of title 5, United States Code Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends a law to clarify that any rule that needs congressional approval under section 802 of title 5, which impacts the budget, will be assumed active unless Congress disapproves it.
5. Government Accountability Office study of rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Comptroller General is tasked with conducting a study to find out how many federal rules and major rules are currently active and what their combined economic costs are. The findings of this study must be reported to Congress within one year of the law being enacted.
6. Definition of “rule” to include significant guidance Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill modifies Section 551(4) of title 5 in the United States Code to broaden the definition of a "rule" to also include "significant guidance," as defined in section 804.