Setting Manageable Analysis Requirements in Text Act of 2025 or the SMART Act of 2025This bill requires agencies, when publishing a proposed or final major rule, to include a framework for assessing whether the rule achieves its regulatory objective. An agency must assess a rule in the time frame included in the framework. The assessment must compare the rule's anticipated and actual benefits and costs.Additionally, the assessment must determine whether (1) the rule has been rendered unnecessary because of changes to the subject area affected by the rule or it overlaps with, duplicates, or conflicts with other rules, or state and local government regulations; (2) the rule should be expanded, streamlined, or otherwise modified to accomplish the rule's objective; and (3) other alternatives or modifications to the rule could better achieve the rule's objective. The bill defines a major rule as a rule likely to cause (1) an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; (2) a major increase in costs or prices; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, health, safety, the environment, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
The Act will require federal agencies to submit a framework for evaluating new major rules, including statements of regulatory objectives and methodologies for measuring effectiveness. It also mandates that assessments of these rules be made public to ensure transparency and accountability. These measures are intended to improve compliance with regulatory goals and to ensure that the rules remain relevant and beneficial to the public over time. Moreover, each agency is tasked with conducting a subsequent evaluation within ten years of a rule's implementation to judge its ongoing effectiveness and necessity.
SB76, officially named the Setting Manageable Analysis Requirements in Text Act of 2025, seeks to enhance the effectiveness of major rules in achieving their regulatory objectives through a mandated process of retrospective review. The bill amends Title 5 of the United States Code, establishing clear definitions for 'major rules' and outlining the responsibilities of agencies in assessing the implications of such rules on the economy, public health, and safety, among other areas. Specifically, a 'major rule' is defined as any rule expected to have a considerable economic impact, quantified as an annual effect exceeding $100 million.
Potential points of contention surrounding SB76 include concerns about the burden it may place on government agencies, which may require additional resources to comply with the new assessment and reporting obligations. Critics may argue that the additional requirements could lead to delays in implementing critical regulations that address urgent public needs. Supporters, however, advocate that these measures will foster a more accountable regulatory environment, promoting rules that indeed serve their intended purpose without unnecessary complications or inefficiencies.
Government Operations and Politics