Overview
Title
To require the Secretary of the Treasury, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to examine the ability of the Federal Government to respond to potential fiscal shocks, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
In simple terms, the "RESILIENCE Act" is a plan to help make sure the U.S. government is ready for big money problems, like recessions or disasters, by having important people look at the risks and write reports about them every year. This helps everyone understand what's going on and if we need to be worried about anything.
Summary AI
S. 5225, also known as the "Reassuring Economic Stability In Light of International, Economic, and Natural Conflicts and Emergencies Act" or the "RESILIENCE Act," aims to strengthen the Federal Government's ability to respond to fiscal shocks. The bill mandates the Secretary of the Treasury, alongside the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, to report annually on fiscal risks and impacts of potential crises such as economic recessions, energy crises, natural disasters, or pandemics. It also calls for assessments of short-term and long-term fiscal effects and economic indicators that detail these impacts. Additionally, the Government Accountability Office is required to review these reports and publish its findings.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill titled the “Reassuring Economic Stability In Light of International, Economic, and Natural Conflicts and Emergencies Act” or the “RESILIENCE Act” focuses on strengthening the Federal Government's ability to handle fiscal challenges. It mandates the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to collaboratively assess how various fiscal shocks, such as national or international economic downturns, natural disasters, and other crises, could affect government finances. The goal is to produce an annual report that outlines both short-term and long-term fiscal risks and impacts. Further, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is tasked with reviewing the report and providing feedback to Congress.
Summary of Significant Issues
One of the primary concerns with the RESILIENCE Act is the lack of clear criteria and guidelines for evaluating fiscal risks and impacts, which could result in subjective assessments. Additionally, the discretion given to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget in choosing economic indicators and impacts might lead to selective reporting, potentially compromising transparency.
The bill also poses practical issues related to implementation. The condition-dependent effective date might create delays, affecting timely fiscal response. Furthermore, the frequency of GAO reviews after the initial one-year period is ambiguously stated as "periodically," which could lead to inconsistent oversight.
Additionally, the title of the Act is notably lengthy, making it cumbersome for repeated use. The acronym "RESILIENCE Act" does not closely align with the full title, possibly leading to confusion.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill aims to safeguard public interests by ensuring that the federal government can effectively respond to fiscal challenges. By requiring annual assessments of potential crises, the government intends to prepare better for unforeseen events that could impact the economy, ultimately aiming to protect citizens from financial instability.
However, if the examinations lack consistency or transparency, the public might not gain clear insights into the government's preparedness or strategies for dealing with potential fiscal shocks. Effective oversight and transparent reporting are crucial for maintaining public trust in government actions.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For government agencies, particularly the Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget, the bill presents additional responsibilities in analyzing fiscal risks and impacts. While this could promote proactive fiscal planning, the lack of standardized criteria might complicate their tasks and lead to resource challenges.
For Congress and policymakers, the bill provides a structured framework for assessing potential threats to fiscal stability. However, the ambiguous language and broad discretion could hinder efforts to hold these agencies accountable or to compare and assess reports over time.
Financial analysts and economists might benefit from the insights provided in these reports, assuming they are comprehensive and standardized. However, without clear guidelines, the quality and usefulness of the information could vary significantly, affecting stakeholders' ability to make informed assessments.
Lastly, for the Government Accountability Office, the responsibility to review and report on the assessments expands its oversight role. The vague frequency of reviews, however, may pose challenges in ensuring consistent and effective oversight.
Issues
The definition and usage of significant economic impacts and indicators in Section 2 might allow for selective reporting by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, which could reduce transparency and accountability.
Section 2 lacks clear guidelines or criteria for evaluating fiscal risks and impacts, leading to potentially subjective or inconsistent assessments. This could significantly affect government accountability and fiscal stability.
The broad discretion granted in Section 2 to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget in structuring and reporting the examination could lead to inconsistencies and a lack of standardization, impacting the quality and reliability of reports.
The effective date clause in Section 2(b) introduces a condition that might unpredictably delay implementation, which could affect timely government response to fiscal challenges.
Section 2(c) does not specify the frequency of the Comptroller General’s reviews beyond the initial 1-year review, stating only 'periodically,' which is vague and could lead to gaps in oversight.
The short title in Section 1, 'Reassuring Economic Stability In Light of International, Economic, and Natural Conflicts and Emergencies Act' or 'RESILIENCE Act,' is lengthy and cumbersome for repeated citation, and its acronym does not intuitively match the full title, potentially causing confusion.
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 this law, called the “RESILIENCE Act,” explains its title. This Act aims to provide reassurances and stability against international, economic, and natural conflicts and emergencies.
2. Annual report Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Secretary of the Treasury and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to examine and report on how potential national and international fiscal shocks, such as economic recessions or natural disasters, would affect the U.S. government's finances. This report will include both short-term and long-term effects and will consider past events and responses. A review of the report's findings will be published by the Government Accountability Office within a year and shared with relevant Senate and House committees.