Administrative Process Act; certain regulations to require legislative approval.
Impact
If passed, HB 1934 would require a formal economic impact analysis for proposed regulations that could impose costs exceeding $500,000 within five years of implementation. Agencies must be diligent in compiling these analyses, which could delay the regulatory process but aim to protect small businesses and local economies from unintended consequences of new regulations. Furthermore, the requirement for legislative approval introduces an extra layer of scrutiny to the regulatory process, which could both increase oversight and potentially slow the implementation of necessary regulations.
Summary
House Bill 1934, also known as the Administrative Process Act, seeks to modify the regulatory framework in Virginia by mandating legislative approval for certain regulations. The bill requires agencies to conduct a comprehensive economic impact analysis prior to the enactment of regulations, assessing the potential effects on various stakeholders, particularly local businesses. This proposal is aimed at increasing transparency and oversight concerning the regulatory process, ensuring that any regulations proposed do not adversely impact economic growth or impose excessive burdens on businesses.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 1934 appears mixed. Proponents, primarily from the business community and certain legislative factions, view the bill as a necessary step towards fostering economic growth and protecting businesses from regulatory overreach. On the other hand, critics argue that the requirement of legislative approval may hinder the ability of agencies to swiftly implement essential regulations that serve the public interest. This division of opinion underscores a broader debate about the balance between regulatory oversight and the need for efficient governance.
Contention
Notable points of contention include concerns from opponents regarding potential delays in the enactment of regulations that are critical for public safety and environmental protection. Critics worry that the added bureaucracy could result in a misalignment between regulatory needs and the urgency with which they must be addressed. This could ultimately lead to a regulatory landscape where the emphasis on economic impact analysis overshadows the goals of public welfare and safety, potentially compromising the effectiveness of the regulatory framework in place.
Administrative rules; creating the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025; requiring Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency to conduct certain analyses. Effective date.