H.R.821 - Middle Class Regulatory Relief Act of 1995104th Congress (1995-1996)
|Sponsor:||Rep. McIntosh, David M. [R-IN-2] (Introduced 02/03/1995)|
|Committees:||House - Government Reform; Judiciary; Rules|
|Latest Action:||House - 03/15/1995 Referred to the Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law. (All Actions)|
This bill has the status Introduced
Here are the steps for Status of Legislation:
Summary: H.R.821 — 104th Congress (1995-1996)All Information (Except Text)
Introduced in House (02/03/1995)
Middle Class Regulatory Relief Act of 1995 - Amends Federal law to define "major rule" as a rule or a group of closely related rules that the proposing agency or the President determines is likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $50 million or more in reasonably quantifiable increased costs, or has a significant impact on a sector of the economy.
(Sec. 2) Authorizes an agency proposing the rule or the President to designate as a major rule any rule or group of closely related rules which is likely to result in: (1) a substantial increase in costs or prices for wage earners, consumers, individual industries, nonprofit organizations, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions; or (2) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, the environment, public health or safety, or the ability of enterprises whose principal places of business are in the United States to compete in domestic or export markets.
Requires each Federal agency, before publishing notice of proposed rulemaking for any rule, to determine whether the rule is or should be designated major. Requires the agency to issue at the time of the notice of proposed rulemaking a draft cost-benefit analysis which shall be summarized in such notice.
Prohibits an agency from promulgating a rule unless it finds that: (1) the rule's potential benefits to society outweigh its costs; and (2) such rule will provide greater net benefits to society than reasonable alternatives, including certain market-based mechanisms.
Subjects agency and presidential rule determinations or designations to judicial review.
Authorizes any person subject to a major rule to petition the agency or the President to perform a cost-benefit analysis.
Requires an agency, before a major rule can become final, to submit to the Congress a copy of the rule and a report containing a concise statement on the rule, a complete copy of the cost-benefit analysis, and the proposed effective date of the rule. Prohibits a rule from becoming final if the Congress passes a joint resolution of disapproval.
Prohibits the promulgation of any rule that expands Federal jurisdiction beyond the level of regulatory action needed to satisfy statutory requirements.
Requires a court reviewing a final agency action to affirm an agency's interpretation of the statute granting authority to promulgate the rule if, in applying traditional principles of statutory construction, it finds that the interpretation is clearly the interpretation of the statute intended by the Congress. Requires the head of each Federal agency to prepare: (1) a risk assessment for each proposed major rule relating to human health, safety, or natural resources; and (2) for each such proposed or final rule, an assessment of incremental risk reduction or other benefits associated with each significant regulatory alternative to the rule or proposed rule (including a comparison of any human health, safety, or natural resource risks addressed by such alternatives to other relevant risks chosen by the agency heads).
Specifies principles for risk assessment, risk characterization, and risk communication, requiring generally that scientific findings and best estimates of risk be distinguished from other considerations.
Requires the President to issue a final regulation for agencies to implement risk assessment and risk characterization principles and provide a format for summarizing risk assessment results.
Requires an agency head, subject to presidential review, to determine for each major rule that: (1) the risk assessment is based on a scientific evaluation supported by the best available scientific data; and (2) there is no alternative allowed by statute under which the major rule is promulgated that would achieve an equivalent reduction in risk in a more cost-effective and flexible manner.
Requires an agency head to prioritize the use of available resources under laws protecting human health and safety or the environment to address the risks to human health, safety, and natural resources that: (1) the agency determines are the most serious; and (2) can be addressed in a cost-effective manner while achieving the greatest overall net reduction in risks with the public and private sector resources to be expended. Requires such priorities to be incorporated into the agency's budget request to the Congress.
Directs the President to develop a systematic program for peer review of work products.
Requires the President to: (1) establish procedures for agency compliance with this Act; and (2) monitor, review, and ensure such compliance.
Authorizes an affected small entity to petition for the judicial review of a final rule with respect to which an agency: (1) has certified that it would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities; (2) prepared a final regulatory flexibility analysis.