Overview
Title
To amend title 5, United States Code, to address the responsibilities of the Administrator of General Services with respect to Federal advisory committees, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
This bill wants to make sure that people know all about special groups that help the government by sharing important details about them online, like their names and what they do. It also wants everyone to follow the same rules when managing these groups and check regularly to see if they can get better at what they do.
Summary AI
The bill S. 5302 aims to update title 5 of the United States Code related to the responsibilities of the Administrator of General Services concerning Federal advisory committees. It focuses on enhancing the collection and publication of information about these committees, including their names, purposes, members, and costs, and requires this data to be publicly accessible online. Additionally, the bill mandates the creation of uniform guidelines for the management of advisory committees and establishes requirements for reporting and performance measures to ensure compliance and standardization across agencies. This bill also requires biennial reports with recommendations for improvements to be submitted to relevant congressional committees.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation titled "Federal Advisory Committee Database Act," seeks to refine the procedures surrounding federal advisory committees. Introduced in the Senate, this bill modifies Chapter 10 of Title 5 of the United States Code. Essentially, it aims to enhance transparency and accountability by establishing strict guidelines for collecting and publishing information about these advisory committees, which support governmental functions by providing expert opinions and recommendations. The bill notably requires this information to be made available to the public annually in a digital format that is accessible and easy to process.
Summary of Significant Issues
A major concern with the proposed legislation is the potential administrative burden it imposes on federal agencies. The requirement for collecting detailed data about every federal advisory committee could lead to increased operational costs. For some agencies, managing these requirements could divert resources from other essential functions, raising questions about the necessity and efficiency of such meticulous data collection.
Furthermore, the mandate for publishing this information in a machine-readable format may create additional logistical and financial challenges. Not all government bodies might currently have the technological infrastructure necessary to fulfill these demands without incurring substantial costs or requiring new technical capabilities.
The bill's detailed language and numerous cross-references could also pose comprehension challenges and risk misinterpretation. This could lead to inconsistent application across agencies, undermining the goal of standardizing processes. Additionally, the structure of biennial reports may delay fast responses to issues that arise, potentially hindering efficient improvements in advisory committee operations.
Impact on the Public
For the public at large, the bill promises greater access to information about advisory committees, which play crucial roles in shaping government policies. Enhanced transparency can foster greater public trust in federal operations by improving understanding and accountability. However, if the increased administrative and operational costs are significant, there may be broader budgetary implications that impact public services indirectly.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
On the positive side, stakeholders such as transparency advocates and public watchdogs may welcome the changes. Access to a comprehensive, regularly updated database will facilitate better monitoring of government advisory activities and ensure that these committees operate with integrity and clear oversight.
Conversely, federal agencies will bear the brunt of the implementation requirements. Agencies may face significant challenges in adapting their current frameworks to comply with the new standards without clear guidance on additional funding or resources. This could strain existing agency capabilities, negatively affecting efficiency in the short term.
In summary, while the "Federal Advisory Committee Database Act" has the potential to promote transparency and accountability, it simultaneously presents challenges that may affect the functionality of federal agencies. These challenges include increased costs, the need for technological upgrades, and possible delays in acting on advisory committee evaluations. Balancing the bill's benefits against its complications will be crucial for stakeholders involved in implementing these changes.
Issues
The requirement for collecting extensive information on advisory committees as outlined in section 1006(a)(2) might lead to administrative burdens and increased operational costs without clear evidence of necessity, potentially impacting government efficiency and resource allocation.
The mandate in section 1006(a)(2)(B) for information to be published in a machine-readable format could impose additional costs or technical challenges for some agencies, raising concerns about the digital infrastructure and capabilities needed for compliance.
The lengthy and detailed language used in section 1006(a)(2)(A) can lead to confusion or misinterpretation by those responsible for implementation, risking inconsistent application or misunderstandings that could affect committee operations.
Subsection 1006(b)(3) allows the Administrator to submit biennial reports, which may delay timely actions on issues identified in the reviews, potentially hindering the accountability and responsiveness of advisory committees.
The addition of 'regulations' in section 1006(c)(i)(I) without explicit guidelines can lead to inconsistent implementation across agencies, causing varied adherence and interpretation, which may undermine the intent of standardized practices.
The complexity of cross-referencing sections like 1004(b)(2), 1009(e) in sections 1006(a)(2)(v) and (viii) could cause comprehension difficulties for new readers or those unfamiliar with the document, potentially leading to implementation errors.
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 bill states that the official title of this legislation is the “Federal Advisory Committee Database Act”.
2. Federal advisory committees Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Chapter 10 of title 5 of the United States Code is updated to enhance the management of federal advisory committees. This includes requiring detailed information collection about each advisory committee, such as their memberships and costs, and mandates that this information be published annually online for transparency. Additionally, agencies must establish consistent guidelines for these committees and report their activities accurately to ensure they comply with new standardization and performance measures.