Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share Facebook Share through Google Plus Share this Page by Email Print this Page

Federal - HR 5

Regulatory Accountability Act of 2017

Introduced

January 3, 2017

Description

A bill to reform the process by which Federal agencies analyze and formulate new regulations and guidance documents, to clarify the nature of judicial review of agency interpretations, to ensure complete analysis of potential impacts on small entities of rules, and for other purposes.

Our Position

Oppose

Original Sponsor 1

Co-Sponsors 25

Latest Actions See More/Less

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.45, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.44, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.43, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.42, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.41, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.40, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.39, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.38, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.37, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Feb. 1, 2017Rutherford, R-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.36, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E122

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.45, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.36, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.35, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.44, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.43, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.27, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.42, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.41, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.40, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.39, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.38, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 24, 2017T. Ryan, D-Ohio, House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.37, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E86

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.44, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.43, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.42, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.41, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.40, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.39, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.38, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.37, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.45, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.36, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Cleaver, D-Mo., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.35, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E57

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.44, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.43, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.42, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.41, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.40, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.39, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.38, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.37, and would have voted yea if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.45, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.36, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.35, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.27, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Becerra, D-Calif., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E56

  • Jan. 12, 2017Gutierrez, D-Ill., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.27, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E55

  • Jan. 12, 2017 — Received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Congressional Record p. S310-S311

  • Jan. 11, 2017Crowley, D-N.Y., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E50

  • Jan. 11, 2017Schakowsky, D-Ill., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.27, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E49

  • Jan. 11, 2017Schakowsky, D-Ill., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. E49

  • Jan. 11, 2017MacArthur, R-N.J., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.44, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. H371

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 45 Rule-Making Process Changes — Passage
    Passage of the bill that would modify the federal rule-making process, including by codifying requirements for agencies to consider costs and benefits of alternatives. The bill would create additional steps that agencies would need to follow when planning "major" rules with annual costs of more than $100 million or "high-impact" rules with annual costs of more than $1 billion. For example, agencies would need to hold an advanced-notice comment period prior to proposing such rules to determine whether to continue the rule-making process. The measure would postpone the effective dates of "high impact" rules until any lawsuits filed within 60 days of the rule's publication in the Federal Register are resolved. It would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering legal challenges to rules. It would also require agencies to evaluate the "indirect" impacts of proposed rules on small businesses. Passed 238-183. Congressional Record p. H371-H372

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 44 Rule-Making Process Changes — Recommit
    Demings, D-Fla., motion to recommit the bill to the House Judiciary Committee with instructions to report back immediately with an amendment that would exempt regulations that significantly lower seniors' out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs under Medicare Part D. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Motion rejected 190-233. Congressional Record p. H370-H371

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Committee of the Whole amendment adopted by voice vote. Congressional Record p. H370

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Posey, R-Fla., amendment no. 16, that would require federal agencies to report on influential scientific information disseminated by the agency in a rule-making proceeding, adopted by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H362-H364

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 43 Rule-Making Process Changes — Land Management Plans
    Grijalva, D-Ariz., amendment that would remove provisions of the bill that would require the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management to conduct regulatory flexibility analyses, which describe the impact on small businesses, for land management plans. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 185-236. Congressional Record p. H361-H362, H369-H370

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 42 Rule-Making Process Changes — Chemical Safety
    Tonko, D-N.Y., amendment that would exempt any rules made under a 2016 chemical safety law. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 188-235. Congressional Record p. H360-H361, H368-H369

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 41 Rule-Making Process Changes — Occupational Safety
    Scott, D-Va., amendment that would exempt rules related to occupational health and safety. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 195-227. Congressional Record p. H359-H360, H368

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 40 Rule-Making Process Changes — Products for Children
    Ruiz, D-Calif., amendment that would exempt rules related to the safety of children's toys or products. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 190-233. Congressional Record p. H358-H359, H367-H368

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 39 Rule-Making Process Changes — Employment and Wages
    Johnson, D-Ga., amendment that would exempt rules related to improving employment and wages, especially for workers with disabilities or limited English proficiency. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 188-234. Congressional Record p. H357-H358, H366-H367

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 38 Rule-Making Process Changes — Foodborne Illness
    Cicilline, D-R.I., amendment that would exempt rules related to the prevention of foodborne illness transmission. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 190-232. Congressional Record p. H356-H357, H366

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 37 Rule-Making Process Changes — Disease Reduction
    Castor, D-Fla., amendment that would exempt rules that will result in reduced incidence of cancer, early death or respiratory disease among children or seniors. It would remove the bill's provision that would effectively overturn two Supreme Court decisions that require federal courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of the underlying law or rule when considering challenges to agency rules. Rejected in Committee of the Whole 189-231. Congressional Record p. H355-H356, H365-H366

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Young, R-Iowa, amendment no. 7, that would allow entities to take 90 days after a regulation is issued to comply, adopted by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H354-H355

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Graves, R-La., amendment no. 6, that would require agencies to provide a retrospective report every five years on major rules that would look at the costs and benefits of the rule on regulated entities, including an assessment of the rule's impacts and whether the major rule is meeting its regulatory objective. If the cost is found to exceed what was estimated, then the agency would need to re-open solicitation for comments for 60 days and consider changes that would reduce costs and increase benefits to regulated entities, adopted by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H352-H354

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 36 Rule-Making Process Changes — Rule Advocacy
    Peterson, D-Minn., amendment that would prohibit agencies from appealing to the public to advocate in support or against a proposed rule. Adopted in Committee of the Whole 260-161. Congressional Record p. H351-H352, H364-H365

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Velazquez, D-N.Y., amendment no. 4, that would remove the bill's small business provisions and require more detailed estimates of a rule's cost to small businesses, rejected by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H349-H351

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Chabot, R-Ohio, amendment no. 3, that would require agencies to include an economic assessment to support their certifications that a proposed rule will not have a "significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities," adopted by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H348-H349

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Chaffetz, R-Utah, amendment no. 2, that would require the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs to issue guidelines required by the bill within 270 days of the bill's enactment, adopted by voice vote. Amendment text. Congressional Record p. H347-H348

  • Jan. 11, 2017House Vote 35 Rule-Making Process Changes — Judicial Review
    Goodlatte, R-Va., amendment that would prohibit a court, while reviewing an agency's rule, from interpreting a gap or ambiguity in a rule or law as an implicit delegation of legislative rule-making authority to the agency. Adopted in Committee of the Whole 237-185. Congressional Record p. H344-H347, H364

  • Jan. 11, 2017 — Considered by the House. Congressional Record p. H323-H372

  • Jan. 10, 2017H. Johnson, D-Ga., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.27, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. H283

  • Jan. 10, 2017H. Johnson, D-Ga., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. H283

  • Jan. 10, 2017F. Wilson, D-Fla., House speech: Personal explanation for roll call vote no.26, and would have voted nay if present. Congressional Record p. H257

  • Jan. 10, 2017House Vote 27 Rule-Making Process Changes and SEC General Solicitation — Rule
    Adoption of the rule (H Res 33) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 79) that would exempt certain events from a Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that calls for verification that attendees are accredited investors, and a bill (HR 5) that would modify the federal rule-making process by codifying certain requirements, including a requirement that agencies estimate the cost of proposed regulations, and would subject rules likely to cost more than $100 million or $1 billion annually to additional procedural steps. Adopted 233-183. Congressional Record p. H257-H258

  • Jan. 10, 2017House Vote 26 Rule-Making Process Changes and SEC General Solicitation — Previous Question
    Collins, R-Ga., motion to order the previous question (thus ending debate and possibility of amendment) on the rule (H Res 33) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill (HR 79) that would exempt certain events from a Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that calls for verification that attendees are accredited investors, and a bill (HR 5) that would modify the federal rule-making process by codifying certain requirements, including a requirement that agencies estimate the cost of proposed regulations, and would subject rules likely to cost more than $100 million or $1 billion annually to additional procedural steps. Motion agreed to 234-179. Congressional Record p. H257

  • Jan. 10, 2017 — Additional cosponsor(s): 3

    Harris, A. (R-Md.)Higgins, C. (R-La.)Rokita, (R-Ind.)
  • Jan. 9, 2017 — Rules Committee resolution, H Res 33, reported to the House as a rule for HR 5.

  • Jan. 9, 2017 — House Rules Committee granted a structured rule providing for consideration of the bill. Congressional Record p. H218-H219, H234

  • Jan. 9, 2017 — Full committee proceeding held by the House Rules Committee.

  • Jan. 9, 2017 — Additional cosponsor(s): 5

    Arrington, (R-Texas)Holding, (R-N.C.)Walters, (R-Calif.)
    Bishop, M. (R-Mich.)Radewagen, (R-A.S.)
  • Jan. 6, 2017 — Additional cosponsor(s): 12

    Byrne, (R-Ala.)Hultgren, (R-Ill.)Smith, Lamar (R-Texas)
    Collins, D. (R-Ga.)Jenkins, E. (R-W.Va.)Tipton, (R-Colo.)
    Franks, T. (R-Ariz.)Labrador, (R-Idaho)Wagner, (R-Mo.)
    Huizenga, (R-Mich.)Sessions, P. (R-Texas)Young, David (R-Iowa)
  • Jan. 3, 2017 — Original cosponsor(s): 5

    Chabot, (R-Ohio)Marino, (R-Pa.)Ratcliffe, (R-Texas)
    Luetkemeyer, (R-Mo.)Peterson, C. (D-Minn.)
  • Jan. 3, 2017 — Read twice and referred to: House Judiciary, House Oversight and Government Reform, House Small Business.Congressional Record p. H37