Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congress is using the Congressional Review Act to try to overturn a recent federal rule. Under that law, Congress can pass a joint resolution of disapproval within a set time after a rule is submitted to Congress. If the resolution becomes law, the named rule is nullified and the agency is generally barred from issuing a substantially similar rule unless Congress enacts new legislation.
The rule titled "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper: Improvements (LCRI)" published at 89 Fed. Reg. 86418 (October 30, 2024).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
CRA disapproval resolutions are considered under expedited procedures in the Senate and can pass there by a simple majority without a typical filibuster; the joint resolution must be enacted (signed by the President or passed over a veto) to nullify the rule. Congress also has a limited window of time after the rule was submitted in which to act.
This joint resolution invokes the Congressional Review Act to disapprove the Environmental Protection Agency rule titled "National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper: Improvements (LCRI)" (89 Fed.
Reg. 86418, Oct 30, 2024).
If enacted, the resolution declares that the specified EPA rule "shall have no force or effect." The text contains no other amendments or policy details beyond disapproval.
Narrow, procedural bill with clear partisan signaling; easier in one chamber but difficult to complete bicameral approval and survive executive action or veto.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise CRA disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the targeted rule and states the dispositive outcome (nullification). It relies on the Congressional Review Act framework by reference rather than elaborating procedural or consequential details within the text.
Progressives emphasize public-health and environmental-justice harms.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize public-health and environmental-justice harms.
Likely strongly opposed to the resolution because it nullifies an EPA drinking-water rule addressing lead and copper.
They view the rule as a public-health and environmental-justice measure and would see disapproval as removing necessary protections.
Mixed view: supports congressional oversight of rulemaking but worries about removing a public-health rule without alternatives.
Would want tradeoffs addressed like costs, timelines, and funding for compliance before supporting disapproval.
Likely supportive of the resolution as a rollback of federal regulatory action.
Views disapproval as correcting EPA overreach and protecting utilities and ratepayers from costly mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, procedural bill with clear partisan signaling; easier in one chamber but difficult to complete bicameral approval and survive executive action or veto.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize public-health and environmental-justice harms.
Narrow, procedural bill with clear partisan signaling; easier in one chamber but difficult to complete bicameral approval and survive execu…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise CRA disapproval resolution that clearly identifies the targeted rule and states the dispositive outcome (nullification). It relies on the Congressional R…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.