Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 418
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Government Operations and Politics
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2025-06-24T08:05:39Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act (H.R. 418) aims to increase oversight and accountability in how federal agencies create rules. It ensures that major regulatory decisions are directly handled by high-level political appointees confirmed by the Senate, rather than lower-level staff, to promote responsibility at the top of government agencies.
Key Provisions
- Signing and Issuance of Rules: Any rule created through the standard federal rulemaking process (under Section 553 of Title 5, U.S. Code, part of the Administrative Procedure Act) must be signed and issued by a person appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate (a Senate-confirmed appointee). This excludes minor internal rules that don't affect the public.
- Initiation of Rulemaking: The start of any such rulemaking process must be approved by a "senior appointee," defined as a Senate-confirmed official, someone acting in such a role, or a non-career member of the Senior Executive Service (a high-level civil service position reserved for executives).
- Exceptions for Emergencies: Agencies can bypass these requirements if the agency head (on their own authority, without delegating) decides it would harm public safety or security. In such cases, the agency must notify the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA, a part of the Office of Management and Budget) and publish the reasons in the Federal Register (the official government journal), while protecting sensitive information.
- Oversight and Compliance: Agency heads must ensure their organizations follow these rules. OIRA's Administrator provides guidance to agencies and monitors compliance.
- Limitations: The law does not change the existing roles of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director in handling budgets, administration, or legislative proposals.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Under current law, federal agencies can issue rules through delegated authority to career civil servants without direct involvement from Senate-confirmed leaders. This bill changes that by mandating personal sign-off and initiation by political appointees for most rules, shifting more control to the executive branch's top appointees.
- It adds a new layer of notification and publication for exceptions, which wasn't required before for safety-related bypasses.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Agencies may face delays in rulemaking if senior appointees are unavailable, potentially slowing regulatory processes. It centralizes decision-making, reducing autonomy for career staff and increasing reliance on political leadership.
- On Citizens: The public could see rules that are more aligned with the President's priorities, as they require high-level approval. This might lead to fewer "independent" regulations but could also enhance transparency through required notifications for exceptions. No direct international impacts are outlined, though it could indirectly affect global regulations (e.g., trade or environmental rules) by altering how U.S. agencies operate.
- Overall: It promotes accountability but might politicize technical rulemaking, affecting how regulations on health, environment, or business are developed.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: All executive branch agencies (as defined in federal law) that issue rules, including departments like Health and Human Services or Environmental Protection Agency.
- Political Appointees and Agency Heads: Senate-confirmed leaders who must now personally approve and sign rules.
- OIRA and OMB: Responsible for guidance, monitoring, and notifications.
- Career Civil Servants: Their role in initiating or finalizing rules is limited, potentially changing internal workflows.
- Public and Regulated Industries: Citizens, businesses, and advocacy groups impacted by agency rules, as the process becomes more top-down.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces the Administrative Procedure Act by adding accountability requirements without altering core rulemaking steps. The nondelegable exception for agency heads ensures decisions stay at the top level.
- Constitutional: Could strengthen executive branch control over agencies (aligning with Article II's vesting of executive power in the President) but might raise questions about limiting Congress's intent for independent agency expertise. No direct constitutional challenges are implied in the text.
- Political: By requiring Senate-confirmed involvement, it ties rulemaking more closely to elected officials and the President, potentially reducing "deep state" influences (a common political critique) while inviting partisan debates over regulatory priorities. It does not affect judicial review of rules.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (11)
Rep. Golden, Jared F. [D-ME-2], Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large], Rep. Ellzey, Jake [R-TX-6], Rep. Crenshaw, Dan [R-TX-2], Rep. Brecheen, Josh [R-OK-2], Rep. Fitzgerald, Scott [R-WI-5], Rep. Green, Mark E. [R-TN-7], Rep. Gill, Brandon [R-TX-26], Rep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11], Rep. Van Drew, Jefferson [R-NJ-2], Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17]
Recent Actions
- 2025-01-15: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-01-15: Introduced in House
- 2025-01-15: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Ensuring Accountability in Agency Rulemaking Act — issued 2025-01-15 — PDF (4 pages)