Relating to legislative review and approval of certain state agency rules.
Impact
If enacted, HB 2017 could substantially change the dynamics of how state agencies propose and implement rules. By requiring legislative committee approval for certain proposals, the bill may slow down the regulatory process, requiring more time to ensure comprehensive review. On the other hand, proponents of the bill argue that this increased oversight will prevent the implementation of costly and potentially harmful regulations without adequate review. The bill positions the legislature as a critical player in regulatory policymaking, shifting the balance of power towards elected representatives and away from appointed agency officials.
Summary
House Bill 2017, introduced in the Texas legislature, focuses on the legislative review and approval process for certain rules proposed by state agencies. Specifically, it mandates that rules anticipated to have an economic impact of $20 million or more must receive prior approval from a legislative committee before implementation. This act aims to enhance legislative oversight and ensure that significant regulatory changes undergo thorough scrutiny, potentially reducing the chances of arbitrary rule-making by state agencies. The bill is particularly important as it seeks to involve the legislature actively in the regulatory process, thereby increasing accountability.
Contention
There are notable points of contention surrounding HB 2017. Critics argue that the mandatory legislative approval process might hinder the efficiency of state agencies that are tasked with promptly responding to emerging issues through regulations. They express concerns that this could lead to delays in necessary rule-making and potentially compromise public safety and welfare. Furthermore, there is apprehension regarding the potential political influence in regulatory decisions, as rules subject to legislative scrutiny could become politicized, favoring special interests over the public good. These discussions indicate a broader debate about the appropriate balance between legislative oversight and the operational capacity of state agencies.
Relating to a requirement that certain rules proposed by state agencies in the executive branch of state government be approved by certain elected state officials.
Relating to state and local government responses to a pandemic disaster, including the establishment of the Pandemic Disaster Legislative Oversight Committee.
Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; provision related to officeholders raising funds when facing a recall; modify, and require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.
Campaign finance: contributions and expenditures; funds donated to a candidate for recall efforts; require candidate to establish a separate account used for recall purposes. Amends secs. 3, 11, 12, 21, 24 & 52 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.203 et seq.) & adds sec. 21b.
A concurrent resolution recognizing wild rice as sacred and central to the culture and health of Indigenous Peoples in Minnesota and critical to the health and identity of all Minnesota citizens and ecosystems and establishing a commitment to passing legislation to protect wild rice and the freshwater resources upon which it depends.