Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
This bill requires five federal banking regulators (Fed, OCC, FDIC, NCUA, FHFA) to provide Congress 120 days notice, testimony, and a detailed economic analysis before proposing or finalizing any "major covered rule" that aligns with recommendations from certain non‑governmental international organizations (FSB, BIS, NGFS, BCBS). A "major covered rule" is one the agency estimates will affect the U.S. economy by $10 billion or more over ten years.
Role of independent regulators versus congressional oversight and control
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed administrative reform that clearly sets out new procedural obligations (timing, recipients, and analytical content) for major rulemakings tied to certain international organizations and adds annual reporting requirements for climate-related engagements.
This bill requires five federal banking regulators (Fed, OCC, FDIC, NCUA, FHFA) to provide Congress 120 days notice, testimony, and a detailed economic analysis before proposing or finalizing any "major covered rule" that aligns with recommendations from certain non‑governmental international organizations (FSB, BIS, NGFS, BCBS).
A "major covered rule" is one the agency estimates will affect the U.S. economy by $10 billion or more over ten years.
The bill also bars regulators from engaging with specified international organizations on climate-related financial risk during a year unless they submit an annual report describing their participation and those organizations' funding sources.
Narrow but politically charged procedural limits on regulators gain support in one chamber more easily than the other; Senate filibuster dynamics and agency opposition reduce odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed administrative reform that clearly sets out new procedural obligations (timing, recipients, and analytical content) for major rulemakings tied to certain international organizations and adds annual reporting requirements for climate-related engagements.
Role of independent regulators versus congressional oversight and control
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Role of independent regulators versus congressional oversight and control
Likely skeptical or opposed.
The persona sees the bill as adding political hurdles that could hinder regulators from implementing evidence-based, internationally coordinated prudential or climate risk rules.
They view transparency requirements as reasonable but worry the 120‑day preclearance and $10 billion threshold could be used to delay or block needed regulations.
Mixed view.
The persona appreciates increased oversight, cost projections, and transparency, but worries about procedural delays, politicization, and administrative burden.
They would look for safeguards that preserve regulators' ability to act in crises while improving Congress's information.
Likely supportive.
The persona views the bill as asserting U.S. sovereignty over banking rules and blocking foreign or international bodies from driving U.S. regulation, especially on climate-related financial policies.
They welcome transparency about international organizations' activities and funding.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow but politically charged procedural limits on regulators gain support in one chamber more easily than the other; Senate filibuster dynamics and agency opposition reduce odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Role of independent regulators versus congressional oversight and control
Narrow but politically charged procedural limits on regulators gain support in one chamber more easily than the other; Senate filibuster dy…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed administrative reform that clearly sets out new procedural obligations (timing, recipients, and analytical content) for major rulemakings tied to certai…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.