Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill (Regulatory Accountability Act) revises Administrative Procedure Act provisions, defining "guidance," "major guidance," and "major rule," and imposes new procedural requirements for rulemaking. It increases Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) review, requires cost‑benefit and "net benefits" analyses for major rules, mandates advanced notice, longer public comment periods, transparent dockets, limits certain agency advocacy communications, establishes review frameworks and retrospective assessments for major rules, and changes judicial review standards.
Left fears delays and weakening of protections; right praises constraint on agency power.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive revision of federal rulemaking law that is precise in statutory mechanics and strong in integration with existing statutes, but it provides limited discussion of resource implications and delegates significant implementation detail to OIRA guidance.
This bill (Regulatory Accountability Act) revises Administrative Procedure Act provisions, defining "guidance," "major guidance," and "major rule," and imposes new procedural requirements for rulemaking.
It increases Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) review, requires cost‑benefit and "net benefits" analyses for major rules, mandates advanced notice, longer public comment periods, transparent dockets, limits certain agency advocacy communications, establishes review frameworks and retrospective assessments for major rules, and changes judicial review standards.
The bill also amends many statutes to make these revised rulemaking procedures broadly applicable and precludes judicial review of certain OIRA actions.
Substantive procedural overhaul with strong ideological implications and high complexity lowers prospects beyond chamber-level passage; requires cross‑chamber and executive agreement.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive revision of federal rulemaking law that is precise in statutory mechanics and strong in integration with existing statutes, but it provides limited discussion of resource implications and delegates significant implementation detail to OIRA guidance.
Left fears delays and weakening of protections; right praises constraint on agency power.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left fears delays and weakening of protections; right praises constraint on agency power.
Skeptical and generally opposed.
They would view the bill as adding procedural hurdles that could delay or weaken protections for health, environment, labor, and civil rights.
They appreciate transparency aims but worry cost‑benefit emphasis and expanded OIRA oversight will bias outcomes toward industry interests.
Mixed view.
They welcome greater transparency, clearer procedures, and predictability for regulated entities, but are concerned this increases administrative burden, slows agency responsiveness, and may shift power toward OIRA without safeguards.
They'd push for reasonable timelines, resources, and emergency exceptions.
Generally supportive.
They would see this bill as reining in agency overreach, imposing disciplined cost‑benefit tests, increasing OIRA oversight, and limiting binding use of guidance.
It aligns with priorities to reduce regulatory burden and enhance accountability.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive procedural overhaul with strong ideological implications and high complexity lowers prospects beyond chamber-level passage; requires cross‑chamber and executive agreement.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left fears delays and weakening of protections; right praises constraint on agency power.
Substantive procedural overhaul with strong ideological implications and high complexity lowers prospects beyond chamber-level passage; req…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a detailed substantive revision of federal rulemaking law that is precise in statutory mechanics and strong in integration with existing statutes, but it provides…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.