Lineage

Jul 16, 2018viewing Reported in Senate Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs See what changed
Jul 16, 2018 Referred in Senate Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs See what changed
Jul 13, 2018 Engrossed in House See what changed
Jan 3, 2017 Reported in House Ms. Foxx (for herself and Mr. Cuellar) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on the Budget, Rules, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned See what changed
Jan 3, 2017 Introduced in House Ms. Foxx (for herself and Mr. Cuellar) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committees on the Budget, Rules, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

H.R. 50 — what changed

Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2017 2018

From Referred in Senate to Reported in Senate. 9 sections amended between Referred in Senate and Reported in Senate.

Section 1 Short title

changed This Act may be cited as the “Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of ~~2017”.~~2017 2018”.

Sec. 2 PurposePurposes

changed The purpose purposes of this Act ~~is—~~is are—

(1)

to improve the quality of the deliberations of Congress with respect to proposed Federal mandates by—

(A)

providing Congress and the public with more complete information about the effects of such mandates; and

(B)

ensuring that Congress acts on such mandates only after focused deliberation on their effects; and

(2)

to enhance the ability of Congress and the public to identify Federal mandates that may impose undue harm on consumers, workers, employers, small businesses, private property owners, and State, local, and tribal governments.

Sec. 3 Providing for Congressional Budget Office studies on policies involving changes in conditions of grant aid

Section 202(g) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 602(g)) is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

changed “(3) Additional studies—At the request of any Chairman or ranking member of the minority of a Committee of the Senate or the House of Representatives, the Director ~~shall~~ shall, to the extent practicable, conduct an assessment comparing the authorized level of funding in a bill or resolution to the prospective costs of carrying out any changes to a condition of Federal assistance being imposed on State, local, or tribal governments participating in the Federal assistance program concerned or, in the case of a bill or joint resolution that authorizes such sums as are necessary, an assessment of an estimated level of funding compared to such costs.”

Sec. 5 Expanding the scope of reporting requirements to include regulations imposed by independent regulatory agencies

changed Paragraph (1) of section 421 Section 421(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. ~~658)~~ 658(1)) is amended by striking “, but does not include independent regulatory agencies” and inserting “, except it does not include the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Open Market Committee, or the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau”.

Sec. 6 Amendments to replace Office of Management and Budget with Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

changed The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4; 2 U.S.C. ~~1511~~ 15111501 et seq.) is amended—

(1)

in section 103(c) (2 U.S.C. 1511(c))—

(A)

in the subsection heading, by striking “Office of Management and Budget” and inserting “Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”; and

(B)

by striking “Director of the Office of Management and Budget” and inserting “Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”;

(2)

in section 205(c) (2 U.S.C. 1535(c))—

(A)

in the subsection heading, by striking “OMB”; and

(B)

by striking “Director of the Office of Management and Budget” and inserting “Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”; and

(3)

in section 206 (2 U.S.C. 1536), by striking “Director of the Office of Management and Budget” and inserting “Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs”.

Sec. 7 Applying substantive point of order to private sector mandates

changed Section 425(a)(2) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 658d(a)(2)) is ~~amended—~~amended, in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—

(1)

by striking “Federal intergovernmental mandates” and inserting “Federal mandates”; and

(2)

by inserting “or 424(b)(1)” after “section 424(a)(1)”.

Sec. 9 Expanding the scope of statements to accompany significant regulatory actions

(a)

changed In general— Subsection (a) of section 202 Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. ~~1532)~~ 1532(a)) is amended to read as follows:

changed “(a) In general—Unless otherwise expressly prohibited by law, before promulgating any general notice of proposed rulemaking or any final rule, or within six 6 months after promulgating any final rule that was not preceded by a general notice of proposed rulemaking, if the proposed rulemaking or final rule includes a Federal mandate that may result in an annual effect on State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, in the aggregate of $100,000,000 or more in any 1 year, the agency shall prepare a written statement containing the following:

“(1) The text of the draft proposed rulemaking or final rule, together with a reasonably detailed description of the need for the proposed rulemaking or final rule and an explanation of how the proposed rulemaking or final rule will meet that need.

“(2) An assessment of the potential costs and benefits of the proposed rulemaking or final rule, including an explanation of the manner in which the proposed rulemaking or final rule is consistent with a statutory requirement and avoids undue interference with State, local, and tribal governments in the exercise of their governmental functions.

“(3) A qualitative and quantitative assessment, including the underlying analysis, of benefits anticipated from the proposed rulemaking or final rule (such as the promotion of the efficient functioning of the economy and private markets, the enhancement of health and safety, the protection of the natural environment, and the elimination or reduction of discrimination or bias).

“(4) A qualitative and quantitative assessment, including the underlying analysis, of costs anticipated from the proposed rulemaking or final rule (such as the direct costs both to the Government in administering the final rule and to businesses and others in complying with the final rule, and any adverse effects on the efficient functioning of the economy, private markets (including productivity, employment, and international competitiveness), health, safety, and the natural environment).

“(5) Estimates by the agency, if and to the extent that the agency determines that accurate estimates are reasonably feasible, of—

“(A) the future compliance costs of the Federal mandate; and

changed “(B) any disproportionate budgetary effects of the Federal mandate upon any particular regions of the Nation United States or particular State, local, or tribal governments, urban or rural or other types of communities, or particular segments of the private sector.

“(6)

“(A) A detailed description of the extent of the agency’s prior consultation with the private sector and elected representatives (under section 204) of the affected State, local, and tribal governments.

“(B) A detailed summary of the comments and concerns that were presented by the private sector and State, local, or tribal governments either orally or in writing to the agency.

“(C) A detailed summary of the agency’s evaluation of those comments and concerns.

“(7) A detailed summary of how the agency complied with each of the regulatory principles described in section 201.

“(8) An assessment of the effects that the proposed rulemaking or final rule are expected to have on private property owners, including the use and value of affected property.”

(b)

changed Requirement for detailed summary— Subsection (b) of section 202 of such Act Section 202(b) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532(b)) is amended by inserting “detailed” before “summary”.

Sec. 11 New authorities and responsibilities for Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

Section 208 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1538) is amended to read as follows:

“208. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs responsibilities

“(a) In General—The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs shall provide meaningful guidance and oversight so that each agency’s regulations for which a written statement is required under section 202 are consistent with the principles and requirements of this title, as well as other applicable laws, and do not conflict with the policies or actions of another agency. If the Administrator determines that an agency’s regulations for which a written statement is required under section 202 do not comply with such principles and requirements, are not consistent with other applicable laws, or conflict with the policies or actions of another agency, the Administrator shall identify areas of non-compliance, notify the agency, and request that the agency comply before the agency finalizes the regulation concerned.

changed “(b) Annual Statements to Congress on Agency Compliance—The Director Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs annually shall submit to Congress, including the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives, a written report detailing compliance by each agency with the requirements of this title that relate to regulations for which a written statement is required by section 202, including activities undertaken at the request of the Director to improve compliance, during the preceding reporting period. The report shall also contain an appendix detailing compliance by each agency with section 204.”

Sec. 12 Retrospective analysis of existing Federal regulations

changed The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4; 2 U.S.C. 1511 1501 et seq.) is amended—

(1)

by redesignating section 209 as section 210; and

(2)

by inserting after section 208 the following new section 209:

“209. Retrospective analysis of existing Federal regulations

“(a) Requirement—At the request of the chairman or ranking minority member of a standing or select committee of the House of Representatives or the Senate, an agency shall conduct a retrospective analysis of an existing Federal regulation promulgated by an agency.

changed “(b) Report—Each agency conducting a retrospective analysis of existing Federal regulations pursuant to subsection (a) shall submit to the chairman of the relevant committee, Congress, and the Comptroller General of the United States a report containing, with respect to each Federal regulation covered by the analysis—

“(1) a copy of the Federal regulation;

“(2) the continued need for the Federal regulation;

“(3) the nature of comments or complaints received concerning the Federal regulation from the public since the Federal regulation was promulgated;

“(4) the extent to which the Federal regulation overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal regulations, and, to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules;

“(5) the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the Federal regulation;

“(6) a complete analysis of the retrospective direct costs and benefits of the Federal regulation that considers studies done outside the Federal Government (if any) estimating such costs or benefits; and

“(7) any litigation history challenging the Federal regulation.”