Overview
Title
To establish a task force for regulatory oversight and review.
ELI5 AI
S. 973, called the "LIBERATE Act," is a plan to create a special team to look at rules that might make it harder for businesses to do well, and they will tell Congress if any rules should be changed or removed. This team will have both government and regular people in it, and they'll use some existing resources to do their work without any new money.
Summary AI
S. 973, also known as the "LIBERATE Act," proposes the creation of the Regulatory Oversight and Review Task Force, aiming to evaluate and suggest changes to federal regulations that may hinder competition, create barriers for businesses, or increase operating costs. The task force will consist of government and private sector members and will consult with the Government Accountability Office. It will also solicit public input and produce regular reports to Congress with recommendations for modifying or repealing certain regulations. No additional funding is authorized for this task force, which will rely on existing Office of Management and Budget resources.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation, referred to as the "Locating the Inefficiencies of Bureaucratic Edicts to Reform And Transform the Economy Act" or the "LIBERATE Act," seeks to establish a task force known as the Regulatory Oversight and Review Task Force. This task force is tasked with evaluating federal regulations to suggest changes that could alleviate unnecessary burdens and enhance competitiveness for U.S. businesses. The group will be composed of a mix of government officials and private sector experts. It will receive input from the public, consult with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and regularly report its findings and recommendations to Congress.
Summary of Significant Issues
The bill contains several notable issues:
Selection and Potential Biases: The selection process for Task Force members from the private sector is left to political figures. This could introduce biases or favoritism, which may undermine the impartiality needed for effective regulatory review.
Lack of Compensation: Members of the Task Force will not receive compensation, as specified in the bill. This could lessen motivation and diminish the effectiveness of the group, as voluntary service may not attract or retain individuals with the necessary expertise and commitment.
Funding Constraints: The Task Force will rely on existing funding from the Office of Management and Budget. No additional funding has been authorized, which could strain resources and limit the Task Force's capacity to fulfill its mandate effectively.
Broad Criteria for Evaluation: The criteria for evaluating regulations are broad and somewhat vague, including terms like "inhibit competition" or "create barriers." This ambiguity could lead to inconsistent application and subjective interpretation.
Political Composition Limits: The requirement to limit the political affiliation of Task Force members to no more than two from the same party, appointed by a single political figure, might complicate the selection process.
Complex Congressional Procedures: The bill outlines intricate procedural guidelines for submitting the Task Force's recommendations to Congress, which could be confusing and may delay decision-making processes.
Undefined Role of the GAO: While the GAO's consultation is mentioned, its specific role and expected contributions are not well-defined, which could lead to unclear operational boundaries and expectations.
Impact on the Public
The public may experience a mixed impact from this legislation. On the positive side, if the Task Force successfully identifies and reduces unnecessary regulatory burdens, it could foster a more competitive business environment, potentially leading to economic growth, more job opportunities, and increased consumer choices. However, if biases or inefficiencies impede the Task Force's operations, these potential benefits may not materialize, leaving current regulatory burdens unchanged.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Businesses and Entrepreneurs: Businesses, including startups and small businesses, stand to benefit from the removal of unnecessary regulations, which could lower costs and foster innovation. However, a lack of clarity in criteria and potential biases in Task Force recommendations could negatively impact specific industries or sectors.
Government Agencies: Federal agencies tasked with providing information to the Task Force may face additional administrative burdens, which could divert focus from their primary responsibilities.
Policymakers: For legislators, the implementation complexities and procedural uncertainties in the bill might introduce challenges in oversight and the enactment of the Task Force's recommendations.
Public Contributors: Individuals and entities that provide input to the Task Force could experience concerns if there's a lack of transparency in how recommendations are evaluated and incorporated into the final reports.
In conclusion, while the LIBERATE Act aims to streamline government regulations to improve economic competitiveness, its success will heavily depend on impartial selection processes, adequate funding, and clear, actionable criteria for evaluating regulations. Addressing these issues could help maximize the potential benefits of the bill for the broader economy and specific stakeholders.
Issues
The selection process for private sector individuals in Section 2(b) is left to political leaders, potentially leading to biases or favoritism, which could undermine the impartiality of the Task Force.
The lack of compensation for Task Force members as stated in Section 2(d) may result in inadequate motivation for effective performance, which could undermine the Task Force's success.
The requirement for the Task Force to rely solely on existing OMB funding as per Section 2(k) could strain resources and affect its ability to function effectively, given that no additional funds are authorized.
The broad and vague criteria for evaluating regulations under Section 2(e), such as 'inhibit competition' or 'create barriers', could lead to varying interpretations and inconsistent applications.
Section 2(b)(2)(C) requires political composition limits for Task Force members, which might be challenging to enforce and could complicate the appointment process.
Section 2(i) outlines complex procedural guidelines for recommendation submissions to Congress, which might lead to delays or confusion in implementation.
Section 2(j)(4) and 2(j)(5) involve intricate procedural rules for Congress's consideration and voting on the Task Force’s recommendations, potentially confusing stakeholders and delaying decisions.
The role of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Section 2(c) is mentioned but not clearly defined in terms of scope or expected outcomes, leaving ambiguity in GAO’s contributions.
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 its short title, which can be referred to as the “Locating the Inefficiencies of Bureaucratic Edicts to Reform And Transform the Economy Act” or simply the “LIBERATE Act”.
2. Regulatory Oversight and Review Task Force Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Regulatory Oversight and Review Task Force is a newly formed group that evaluates federal regulations to suggest changes or repeals, aiming to reduce unnecessary burdens and enhance competition for U.S. businesses. Comprised of government officials and private sector experts, the task force will gather public input, consult with the Government Accountability Office, and report their findings and recommendations to Congress.