Requires the expiration of administrative rules unless promulgated again by a state agency
The expected impact of SB 687 is the modernization of the regulatory framework within which state agencies operate. By requiring these agencies to reassess their regulations regularly, the bill fosters a more agile and responsive governance approach. This would particularly affect rules that have become obsolete or overly burdensome, thus lightening the regulatory load on businesses and individuals alike. Moreover, the bill encourages agencies to engage with the public and regulated communities during the review process, which may lead to more stakeholder-driven governance and rulemaking practices.
Senate Bill 687 aims to amend chapter 536 of Missouri statutes by establishing a requirement for state agencies to conduct regular reviews of their administrative rules. The bill seeks to ensure that rules are either continued, modified, consolidated, or allowed to expire if deemed unnecessary. Specifically, this legislation mandates that any administrative rules not actively promoted for renewal will automatically expire after a set duration, unless an agency goes through the renewal process outlined in the bill. This intended reform aims to streamline and create accountability within the regulatory environment by ensuring that outdated or redundant rules do not persist indefinitely.
In conclusion, SB 687 represents a significant shift in the management of administrative rules in Missouri, emphasizing the need for accountability and public participation. While the bill holds promise for a more efficient regulatory framework, it also invites scrutiny regarding its implementation and the potential implications for essential regulations. As the bill progresses, the discussions will play a crucial role in shaping its final form and determining its long-term effectiveness.
There are notable points of contention surrounding SB 687. Critics may argue that the requirement for periodic reviews could overwhelm smaller agencies or lead to inconsistent application across different departments. Additionally, stakeholders might express concerns about the potential for critical regulations to expire due to a lack of resources for agencies to manage the renewal process. The perceived risk of losing valuable protections or benefits that some rules provide could incite opposition from advocacy groups that depend on these regulations.