If enacted, SB1615 would significantly change the landscape of federal rulemaking by ensuring that agencies conduct detailed analyses of the potential impacts, both positive and negative, of proposed rules. The act emphasizes the need for thorough cost-benefit analysis and stakeholder engagement before rules are finalized, potentially reducing the occurrence of poorly vetted regulations that could affect industries and the public at large. It may also lead to longer timelines for rule development, as agencies would have to comply with these enhanced requirements.
Summary
SB1615, known as the Regulatory Accountability Act, aims to enhance the process of agency rulemaking within the federal government. This bill seeks to impose stricter guidelines on how federal agencies issue regulations, particularly major rules that are expected to have a significant economic impact. One of the central features of the bill is that it mandates agencies to establish an electronic docket for rulemaking and requires them to publish an advance notice in the Federal Register to inform the public about potential new rules, encouraging public involvement in the rulemaking process and transparency of information.
Contention
However, there is a notable division in opinion regarding the bill. Proponents argue that it would offer a necessary check on regulatory processes that often lack adequate public input. They believe that enhancing accountability in agency actions will prevent costly and ineffective regulations. Conversely, critics fear that the bill could slow down the rulemaking process excessively and create additional bureaucratic hurdles for agencies trying to implement important regulations, especially in urgent situations. The debate underscores broader concerns about balancing the need for regulatory oversight with the need for effective governance.
Related
Regulatory Accountability Act This bill expands and provides statutory authority for notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures to require federal agencies to consider (1) whether a rulemaking is required by statute or is within the discretion of the agency, (2) whether existing laws or rules could be amended or rescinded to address the problem, and (3) reasonable alternatives to a new rule. For proposed major or high-impact rules that have a specified significant economic impact or adverse effect on the public health or safety, an agency must publish notice of such rulemaking to invite interested parties to propose alternatives and ideas to accomplish the agency's objectives; allow persons interested in high-impact or certain major rules to petition for a public hearing with oral presentation, cross-examination, and the burden of proof on the proponent of the rule; adopt the rule that maximizes net benefits within the scope of the statutory provision authorizing the rule, unless the agency explains the costs and benefits that justify adopting an alternative rule and such rule is approved by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA); and publish a framework and metrics for measuring the ongoing effectiveness of the rule. Agencies must notify OIRA with certain information about a proposed rulemaking, including specified discussion and preliminary explanations concerning a major or high-impact rule. Further, OIRA must establish certain rulemaking guidelines. Additionally, the bill (1) revises the scope of judicial review of agency actions, and (2) establishes requirements for agencies issuing guidance.
Article I Regulatory Budget Act This bill requires the establishment of a federal regulatory budget to limit the costs of federal regulations. It also establishes requirements for disclosing the projected costs of federal regulations and procedures for enforcing the regulatory budget.
Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act This bill modifies the rulemaking requirements and procedures of federal agencies under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, including how agencies consider economic impact with respect to small entities. Specifically, the bill requires agencies to consider the direct, and the reasonably foreseeable indirect, economic effect of a rule on small entities when determining whether a rule is likely to have a significant economic impact. Further, the regulatory flexibility analysis for rules with a significant economic impact must include a detailed description of alternatives to a proposed rule that minimize any adverse significant economic impact or maximize any beneficial significant economic impact on small entities. The bill also expands the types of agency actions (e.g., revisions to land management plans) that are subject to a regulatory impact analysis. The bill removes the authority for an agency to waive the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements and requires the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to issue rules for compliance with such requirements. The bill also modifies the procedures for the (1) gathering of comments for a proposed rule, (2) periodic review of agency rules, and (3) judicial review of final rules.
National Security Reforms and Accountability Act National Emergencies Reform Act Arms Export Control Reform Act War Powers Resolution Modernization and Accountability Act
Regulatory Accountability Act This bill expands and provides statutory authority for notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures to require federal agencies to consider (1) whether a rulemaking is required by statute or is within the discretion of the agency, (2) whether existing laws or rules could be amended or rescinded to address the problem, and (3) reasonable alternatives to a new rule. For proposed major or high-impact rules that have a specified significant economic impact or adverse effect on the public health or safety, an agency must publish notice of such rulemaking to invite interested parties to propose alternatives and ideas to accomplish the agency's objectives; allow persons interested in high-impact or certain major rules to petition for a public hearing with oral presentation, cross-examination, and the burden of proof on the proponent of the rule; adopt the rule that maximizes net benefits within the scope of the statutory provision authorizing the rule, unless the agency explains the costs and benefits that justify adopting an alternative rule and such rule is approved by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA); and publish a framework and metrics for measuring the ongoing effectiveness of the rule. Agencies must notify OIRA with certain information about a proposed rulemaking, including specified discussion and preliminary explanations concerning a major or high-impact rule. Further, OIRA must establish certain rulemaking guidelines. Additionally, the bill (1) revises the scope of judicial review of agency actions, and (2) establishes requirements for agencies issuing guidance.
Water Quality Certification and Energy Project Improvement Act of 2023 TAPP American Resources Act Transparency, Accountability, Permitting, and Production of American Resources Act Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2023
Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act This bill modifies the rulemaking requirements and procedures of federal agencies under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, including how agencies consider economic impact with respect to small entities. Specifically, the bill requires agencies to consider the direct, and the reasonably foreseeable indirect, economic effect of a rule on small entities when determining whether a rule is likely to have a significant economic impact. Further, the regulatory flexibility analysis for rules with a significant economic impact must include a detailed description of alternatives to a proposed rule that minimize any adverse significant economic impact or maximize any beneficial significant economic impact on small entities. The bill also expands the types of agency actions (e.g., revisions to land management plans) that are subject to a regulatory impact analysis. The bill removes the authority for an agency to waive the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements and requires the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to issue rules for compliance with such requirements. The bill also modifies the procedures for the (1) gathering of comments for a proposed rule, (2) periodic review of agency rules, and (3) judicial review of final rules.
Article I Regulatory Budget Act This bill requires the establishment of a federal regulatory budget to limit the costs of federal regulations. It also establishes requirements for disclosing the projected costs of federal regulations and procedures for enforcing the regulatory budget.