Bills
| 3.23.22

Should More Info About the Cost of Federal Mandates in Bills & Regulations be Available to Congress & the Public? (H.R. 50)

Do you support or oppose this bill?

What is H.R. 50?

(Updated April 14, 2020)

This bill would aim to increase the information available to Congress & the public about federal mandates in proposed bills and regulations. It’d require agencies to measure a proposed rule’s annual effect on the economy, not just “expenditures”, and to conduct an Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) analysis unless a law expressly prohibits them doing so. UMRA analyses would be required for all final rules, even those that weren’t subject to a public comment period.

The Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) current policy of accounting for specific costs of federal mandates — such as foregone business profits, costs passed onto consumers and other entities or behavioral changes — would be codified into law. Congressional committee chairmen and ranking members would be granted authority to request that the CBO perform analyses comparing the authorized levels of funding in bills or resolutions with the potential loss of federal aid dollars when mandate compliance is a condition for that aid.

Federal agencies would be required to consult with private sector entities, like small businesses, that’ll be directly impacted by proposed regulations in the same way they do with state, local, and tribal governments. Agencies would be required to include an appendix in their annual reports to Congress detailing their regulatory consultation with state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.

The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) would be responsible for determining whether agencies have satisfied UMRA’s cost disclosure requirements. It’d allow the judicial branch to place a stay on regulations or invalidate rules if the originating federal agency fails to complete statutorily required UMRA analyses.

Argument in favor

Congress and federal agencies need to be transparent to the public about the costs imposed by federal mandates contained in the legislation or regulation they implement.This bipartisan bill would ensure those costs are publicly available for all regulations.

Argument opposed

This bill is nothing more than an attempt to slow down and sabotage the rulemaking process federal agencies use to make regulations that’d lead to watered down environmental and consumer protections.

Impact

The public; the private sector; state, local, and tribal governments; Congress; and federal agencies, particularly the CBO.

Cost of H.R. 50

The CBO estimates that enacting this bill would cost $6 million over the 2019-2023 period.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) introduced this bill to make more information about the costs of federal mandates in regulations or legislation available to the public and Congress:

“Every year Washington imposes thousands of rules on local governments and small businesses. Hidden in those rules are costly mandates that stretch small businesses. Hidden in those rules are costly mandates that stretch state and city budgets and make it harder for businesses to hire. This legislation will help restore transparency and hold Washington bureaucrats accountable for the true cost — in dollars and in jobs — that federal dictates pose to the economy. Americans are better served when regulators are required to measure and consider the costs of the rules they create.”

Original cosponsor Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX) added:

“This follows the work I did in the Texas State Legislature, where I also passed legislation to stop unfunded mandates from the state government to local governments. We want to help our local governments and businesses by relieving unnecessary and costly red tape so that budgets, projects and jobs aren’t halted. This bill would require the federal government to measure and consider the total cost of the regulations they impose.”

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) expressed opposition to this bill in its committee report, writing:

“H.R. 50, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017, is significantly flawed. The bill would be an assault on the nation’s health, safety, and environmental protections, erect new barriers to unnecessarily slow down the regulatory process, and give regulated industries an unfair advantage to water down consumer protections.”

This legislation passed the House Oversight & Government Reform Committee on a 20-10 vote and has the support of five bipartisan cosponsors, including three Democrats and two Republicans.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: lionvision / iStock)