Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1155

Bureaucracy Check: Should Federal Regulations be Reviewed and Cut if They are Excessive?

Argument in favor

Federal agencies need to assess the effectiveness of their regulations periodically. Having a commission find and cut regulations that are obsolete or unnecessarily burdensome would help ensure that current and future regulations should remain in effect.

operaman's Opinion
···
01/06/2016
Not only Burdensome laws and Regulations but Taxes too. Business owners pay employees for work performed. And this pay comes from profits earned during the business cycle. But taxes, like payroll tax, cramps a business and stunts growth. More capital from growth can promote expansion reflected by more jobs and product expansion. Laws, taxes and regulation are like ticks on society.
Like (9)
Follow
Share
markjmccants's Opinion
···
01/07/2016
It would be foolish and financially irresponsible of the government to not spend our tax dollars effectively. Cutting ineffective programs is a great start to being fiscally responsible.
Like (7)
Follow
Share
William's Opinion
···
01/07/2016
Ridding of unnecessary regulations is a perfect way to cut down our debt while allowing the economy to grow. The regulations to be eliminated must pass through congress first, and it prioritizes regulations that are no longer needed, do more bad than good through unnecessary paperwork or bureaucratic procedures, or unfairly targets small businesses. This way, important regulations remain in place.
Like (6)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

Congress shouldn’t allow a commission to be looking over the shoulder of federal agencies during the regulatory process and making decisions about eliminating certain rules. Regulators can be trusted to adjust outdated rules as necessary.

Steven's Opinion
···
01/08/2016
There's nothing excessive about protecting the environment. I like breathing, drinking water and eating food that doesn't poison me. I've gotten used to it, and I'd like it yo continue. Even if it cost shareholders their profits.
Like (6)
Follow
Share
Jared's Opinion
···
01/07/2016
In spirit, I agree with this concept- I believe that all laws should be reviewed and updated or done away with after a decade or so with a caveat that no riders or attachments can be made to any law or bill, and that all bills must have a "Spirit of the Law" declaration at the beginning to clarify intent and scope in the event of conflict. That said, I do not trust our legislators to make any decisions that are congruent with the desires, needs, or will of We, the People. This bill is a work-around for the constant attempts to take the teeth out of the EPA, FDA, Dept of Labor and other regulatory agencies so that those campaign donors to whom these politicians are beholden can do as they please without all those pesky rules that protect us from harm over profit. This is not intended to help the citizens of the United States, it is intended to help the pocket books of the WEALTHY citizens of the United States.
Like (4)
Follow
Share
Alis's Opinion
···
01/07/2016
Congress is more worried about this than ordinary citizens--except rich citizens that can only make a gazillion $$$ instead of 2 gazillion $$$. If you actually accomplished something useful ever, this might become an issue. But you sit on your overpaid asses & take more vacation time than you work so why worry about a regulations when you don't actually do anything except pass "national square dance day" or "let's stop non-existent threats" legislation.
Like (4)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H.R. 1155?

This bill would establish a process by which existing federal regulations can be reviewed, assessed, and replaced or eliminated through a Retrospective Regulatory Review Commission. 

The commission would be responsible for identify rules in the Code of Federal Regulations that should be repealed to lower the "cost of regulation." Their goal would be to reduce regulatory costs by 15 percent with minimal reductions in the effectiveness of regulation.

When reviewing regulations, the commission would prioritize major rules that have certain characteristics, like those that:

  • Have been in effect more than 15 years;

  • Impose paperwork burdens that could be reduced without diminishing regulatory effectiveness;

  • Impose disproportionately high costs on small businesses;

  • Could be made more effective while also reducing regulatory costs.

The commission would be terminated either five years and 180 days after this bill’s enactment, or five years after the members of the commission have all begun their terms — whichever happens later. Congress would have to consider a joint resolution approving of the recommendations that the commission puts forward regarding regulations to be repealed. All information compiled by the commission would be available on its website at no cost to the public.

Federal agencies would be prohibited from reissuing rules that are substantially similar to rules repealed by the Commission without congressional approval. When federal agencies make a new rule, they would have to repeal rules that the commission recommends be repealed to offset the cost of the new rule. Newly issued regulations would need a plan for review within 10 years of its implementation.

Impact

People and businesses who are affected by federal regulations, federal agencies and their employees, the Retrospective Regulatory Review Commission, and general bureaucracy in the U.S.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 1155

$30.00 Million
The CBO estimates that this bill would cost $30 million over the 2016-2020 period.

More Information

Of Note: In its press release detailing this bill’s passage by the committee, the House Judiciary Committee cited reports that the cost of federal regulations totals $1.86 trillion — translating to $15,000 per year for each U.S. household.

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO) introduced this bill to prevent outdated regulations from hindering economic growth:

“My mission with the SCRUB Act is to require a full evaluation of all 175,000-plus pages of the Federal Register and identify outdated and ineffective regulations for removal. This streamlining will lessen regulatory burdens on small businesses and give them the freedom to innovate and grow.”

This bill has nine cosponsors in the House, all of whom are Republicans. It was passed by the House Judiciary Committee by a 17-12 vote.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: Flickr user Christian Schnettelker)

AKA

SCRUB Act of 2016

Official Title

To provide for the establishment of a process for the review of rules and sets of rules, and for other purposes.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
  • The house Passed January 7th, 2016
    Roll Call Vote 245 Yea / 174 Nay
      house Committees
      Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law
      Committee on the Judiciary
      Committee on Oversight and Reform
    IntroducedFebruary 27th, 2015

Log in or create an account to see how your Reps voted!
    Not only Burdensome laws and Regulations but Taxes too. Business owners pay employees for work performed. And this pay comes from profits earned during the business cycle. But taxes, like payroll tax, cramps a business and stunts growth. More capital from growth can promote expansion reflected by more jobs and product expansion. Laws, taxes and regulation are like ticks on society.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    There's nothing excessive about protecting the environment. I like breathing, drinking water and eating food that doesn't poison me. I've gotten used to it, and I'd like it yo continue. Even if it cost shareholders their profits.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    It would be foolish and financially irresponsible of the government to not spend our tax dollars effectively. Cutting ineffective programs is a great start to being fiscally responsible.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Ridding of unnecessary regulations is a perfect way to cut down our debt while allowing the economy to grow. The regulations to be eliminated must pass through congress first, and it prioritizes regulations that are no longer needed, do more bad than good through unnecessary paperwork or bureaucratic procedures, or unfairly targets small businesses. This way, important regulations remain in place.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Hooray! Long past time someone in Congress started making an effort to exercise some oversight of bureaucratic regulations and take some of them off the backs of the people! BUST THOSE CHAINS AND FREE US!
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Congress is more worried about this than ordinary citizens--except rich citizens that can only make a gazillion $$$ instead of 2 gazillion $$$. If you actually accomplished something useful ever, this might become an issue. But you sit on your overpaid asses & take more vacation time than you work so why worry about a regulations when you don't actually do anything except pass "national square dance day" or "let's stop non-existent threats" legislation.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    In spirit, I agree with this concept- I believe that all laws should be reviewed and updated or done away with after a decade or so with a caveat that no riders or attachments can be made to any law or bill, and that all bills must have a "Spirit of the Law" declaration at the beginning to clarify intent and scope in the event of conflict. That said, I do not trust our legislators to make any decisions that are congruent with the desires, needs, or will of We, the People. This bill is a work-around for the constant attempts to take the teeth out of the EPA, FDA, Dept of Labor and other regulatory agencies so that those campaign donors to whom these politicians are beholden can do as they please without all those pesky rules that protect us from harm over profit. This is not intended to help the citizens of the United States, it is intended to help the pocket books of the WEALTHY citizens of the United States.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    A commission shouldn't be able to decide the limit of an agency, and change certain parts of the agency. If a Congress member finds something wrong with an agency, they can simply create a bill expressing the elimination of such agency.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    It's a great idea but we need to refine what will be cut with greater depth. The commission has to be unbiased, must consult the GAO, The IG community, etc. to be effective for all stakeholders. Do that and I think that we can have fiscal responsibility in the fights against ISIS, climate change, disease, rising student debt costs, etc.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    We don't need more commissions or bigger government.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Of course we should cut regulations! We only have about a billion more than we should have! Duh!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Sounds to me like a way for special interests to get rid of regulations they don't want.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Such a commission would overstep the bounds of congressional authority and interfere with agency activities. This would be acceptable if the commission was limited to making recommendations, not rewriting the federal register. The fact that the cosponsors are all Republican signals that this has much more to do with partisan agenda than achieving regulatory efficiency.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Another shameless GOP attempt to easily rid themselves of regulations their Corporate owners don't like and that they don't have the votes to remove that way.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Agencies are capable of pruning non-working regulations; they have the subject matter expertise.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    More bureaucracy to reduce bureaucracy. How could this fail?
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Does this even need to be asked? Of course regulations should be reviewed and cut when excessive.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Slash and burn as much as possible.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    Should have been done decades ago
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    There is too much bureaucracy as it is
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE