Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 19.
This bill amends the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act to require stronger regulatory impact analyses for ‘‘major rules’’ as defined by OIRA, including quantified benefits, costs, and alternatives. Agencies must publish initial and final analyses, consult affected governments and private parties, and generally select the alternative that maximizes net benefits.
Liberals warn net-benefit focus may undercut unquantified health and equity goals
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantively drafted amendment package that specifies new legal obligations, procedural steps, and enforcement pathways for agency rulemaking identified as 'major rules.' It is detailed in definitional and procedural content, integrates cleanly into existing statutory text, and creates accountability through OIRA reporting and judicial review.
This bill amends the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act to require stronger regulatory impact analyses for ‘‘major rules’’ as defined by OIRA, including quantified benefits, costs, and alternatives.
Agencies must publish initial and final analyses, consult affected governments and private parties, and generally select the alternative that maximizes net benefits.
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs gains expanded oversight, reporting duties, and authority to require compliance; courts are given review authority over agency compliance.
Technocratic but consequential procedural changes are modestly likely to pass a receptive lower chamber; significant Senate hurdles and agency opposition reduce overall prospects.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantively drafted amendment package that specifies new legal obligations, procedural steps, and enforcement pathways for agency rulemaking identified as 'major rules.' It is detailed in definitional and procedural content, integrates cleanly into existing statutory text, and creates accountability through OIRA reporting and judicial review.
Liberals warn net-benefit focus may undercut unquantified health and equity goals
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals warn net-benefit focus may undercut unquantified health and equity goals
Likely skeptical.
Supports transparency and consultation but worries cost-focused rules and OIRA enforcement could weaken public health, labor, environmental, and civil-rights protections.
Judicial review and a ‘‘maximize net benefits’’ mandate may tilt rulemaking toward easily quantified economic interests.
Cautiously supportive of improved analysis and stakeholder consultation, viewing procedural clarity as useful.
Concerned about implementation burdens, litigation risk, and potential delays that could impede necessary rulemaking without adequate resourcing.
Likely strongly supportive.
Sees the bill as restoring fiscal and regulatory discipline by requiring quantified analyses, maximizing net benefits, expanding OIRA oversight, and enabling judicial review to curb burdensome unfunded mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic but consequential procedural changes are modestly likely to pass a receptive lower chamber; significant Senate hurdles and agency opposition reduce overall prospects.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals warn net-benefit focus may undercut unquantified health and equity goals
Technocratic but consequential procedural changes are modestly likely to pass a receptive lower chamber; significant Senate hurdles and age…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantively drafted amendment package that specifies new legal obligations, procedural steps, and enforcement pathways for agency rulemaking identified as 'maj…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.