REG Budgeting Act of 2024 Renewing Efficiency in Government by Budgeting Act of 2024
If passed, HB 7867 would significantly alter how unfunded regulatory costs are calculated and enforced within federal agencies. Under this bill, agencies must establish annual limits on these costs, with the requirement of congressional approval for any increases. This change is designed to prevent agencies from imposing excessive regulatory burdens without justification. The emphasis on budgeting in terms of unfunded mandates highlights a move towards more transparent government regulations and could potentially restrict agencies from implementing new rules that could exceed established financial limits without prior oversight.
House Bill 7867, titled the 'Renewing Efficiency in Government by Budgeting Act of 2024', seeks to amend the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 by requiring the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to impose limits on additional unfunded regulatory costs that federal agencies can impose in a given fiscal year. The bill aims to provide greater accountability in regulating costs across government agencies and to ensure that the cumulative fiscal impact of new regulations is monitored and managed effectively, thereby fostering a more efficient government framework.
The general sentiment around HB 7867 appears to be mixed. Advocates argue that the bill is a necessary step towards enhancing government efficiency and reducing unnecessary regulatory burden on states and local entities. They believe that it will create a more manageable regulatory environment. Conversely, critics have raised concerns that limiting regulatory costs may hinder the government’s ability to enforce necessary regulations that protect public health and safety, potentially prioritizing fiscal considerations over essential regulatory functions.
Notable points of contention include debates over the balance between regulatory oversight and fiscal responsibility. Proponents focus on the efficiency and accountability aspects of the legislation, while opponents caution against the potential negative implications for federal regulation that could follow. The bill’s requirement for congressional approval for exceeding limits on unfunded costs raises questions about the potential for political influence in regulatory decisions and the effectiveness of bureaucratic enforcement of necessary regulations that may require more funds.