S.485 - Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
S.485, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2025 (REINS Act), aims to amend Title 5 of the United States Code, requiring congressional approval for major executive branch rules to take effect. The bill seeks to increase accountability and transparency in the federal regulatory process by ensuring that major rules undergo a vote in Congress. This is intended to address concerns that Congress has excessively delegated its legislative powers to the executive branch.
The bill defines major rules as those having significant economic impacts (e.g., an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more) and establishes procedures for congressional review and approval of both major and non-major rules. It also includes provisions for judicial review, exemptions for certain types of rules (e.g., monetary policy, deregulatory actions), and requirements for regulatory planning and budget.
Furthermore, the bill mandates a Government Accountability Office (GAO) study to determine the number and economic cost of existing rules and amends the definition of "rule" in Title 5 to include significant guidance.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of the REINS Act would be to shift power from the executive branch to the legislative branch regarding the implementation of regulations. Federal agencies would need to account for the additional time and potential hurdles of congressional approval when creating new regulations.
This could lead to fewer new regulations being enacted, as Congress may choose not to approve certain rules proposed by the executive branch. The Act could also result in more carefully drafted legislation, as Congress would be more involved in the regulatory process.
Potential Benefits
- Increased congressional oversight of executive branch regulations, potentially leading to more accountable governance.
- Greater transparency in the regulatory process, as all major rules would be subject to congressional review and public debate.
- More carefully drafted and detailed legislation, as Congress would be more directly involved in the content of regulations.
- Potential reduction in the number of regulations, which could reduce compliance costs for businesses and individuals.
- Enhanced public awareness of the costs and benefits of proposed regulations through the required reporting and analysis.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Significant delays in implementing new regulations due to the requirement for congressional approval, potentially hindering the government's ability to respond to emerging issues.
- Increased political gridlock, as congressional approval of regulations could become highly partisan.
- Potential for special interests to exert undue influence on the regulatory process through lobbying and campaign contributions.
- Reduced flexibility for federal agencies to adapt regulations to changing circumstances, as any modifications would require congressional approval.
- Increased workload for Congress, requiring them to dedicate more time and resources to reviewing and approving regulations.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The REINS Act raises constitutional questions related to the separation of powers and the delegation of legislative authority. Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution vests all legislative powers in Congress. The Act seeks to reassert congressional control over rulemaking, which some argue has been excessively delegated to the executive branch.
However, the Act could be viewed as an infringement on the executive branch's constitutional duty to execute the laws, as outlined in Article II, Section 3. The requirement for congressional approval of regulations could unduly burden the executive branch's ability to implement legislation effectively.
Ultimately, the constitutionality of the REINS Act would likely be determined by the courts, weighing the balance between Congress's legislative powers and the executive branch's duty to execute the laws.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).