Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Streamline the Code of Federal Regulations Act of 2025
The bill is expected to significantly impact the legislative landscape by allowing for the quicker identification and removal of regulations that are no longer relevant or necessary. By reducing the burden of outdated rules, the bill aims to streamline federal regulations and improve overall government efficiency. The process outlined in SB1110 requires agencies to act swiftly, with strict timelines for reviewing identified regulations and either amending or rescinding them. This could lead to a more dynamic regulatory environment where compliance remains manageable and up-to-date with current societal needs and technological advances.
SB1110, known as the 'Leveraging Artificial Intelligence to Streamline the Code of Federal Regulations Act of 2025', seeks to enhance the efficiency of the federal regulatory process by employing artificial intelligence to identify redundant and outdated regulations. Introduced in the Senate, the bill mandates that the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, in collaboration with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, implement an annual review process of the Code of Federal Regulations using AI systems designed to meet established standards for accuracy and transparency. The overarching goal of this legislative effort is to modernize the federal regulatory framework by eliminating inefficiencies that may hinder compliance and operational effectiveness for both agencies and the public.
While proponents argue that the use of artificial intelligence in regulatory reviews will lead to greater efficiency and a reduction in bureaucratic red tape, there may be concerns regarding the transparency and accountability of AI systems in critical decision-making processes. Critics could argue that reliance on AI might overlook the nuances of certain regulations that require human judgment to assess their relevance and impact. Additionally, there are fears that the expedited processes for rescission or amendment of regulations may bypass essential stakeholder engagement, leading to pushback from advocacy groups seeking to maintain regulatory protections.