H.J.Res.100 - Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Trade Commission relating to Negative Option Rule. (119th Congress)
Summary
H.J.Res.100 is a joint resolution introduced in the House of Representatives aimed at disapproving a rule submitted by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concerning the "Negative Option Rule". The resolution seeks to utilize the Congressional Review Act (CRA), codified in chapter 8 of title 5 of the United States Code, to nullify the FTC's rule.
The resolution was submitted by Ms. Lee of Florida and referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The core purpose is to exert congressional oversight over regulatory actions taken by the FTC.
Essentially, Congress is attempting to block an FTC rule related to negative option marketing, where consumers may be charged for goods or services unless they explicitly decline.
Expected Effects
If H.J.Res.100 is enacted, the FTC's "Negative Option Rule" would be invalidated. This would prevent the rule from taking effect or continuing in effect.
Businesses that rely on negative option marketing would not be subject to the specific requirements outlined in the disapproved rule. Consumers would potentially lose the protections afforded by the rule, depending on the nature of those protections.
Potential Benefits
- Could reduce regulatory burden on businesses, potentially lowering costs and fostering innovation in marketing strategies.
- May prevent the FTC from overstepping its authority, reinforcing congressional oversight of regulatory agencies.
- Could lead to more flexible business models, allowing companies to offer subscription services and other products with less stringent regulatory constraints.
- Might encourage businesses to be more transparent and competitive in their offerings, as they would not be bound by specific FTC mandates.
- Could streamline business operations by avoiding the need to comply with the specific requirements of the Negative Option Rule.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Consumers may face increased risks of being enrolled in unwanted subscription services or charged for products they did not explicitly agree to purchase.
- Reduced transparency in marketing practices could make it more difficult for consumers to understand the terms and conditions of offers.
- The absence of the rule could lead to deceptive or unfair business practices, harming consumers financially.
- May undermine the FTC's ability to protect consumers from negative option scams and other related fraudulent activities.
- Could create an uneven playing field where businesses that engage in deceptive practices gain an unfair advantage over those that prioritize consumer protection.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The resolution aligns with the principle of congressional oversight of executive agencies, as outlined in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution, which vests all legislative powers in Congress. The Congressional Review Act (under which this resolution is filed) is a mechanism for Congress to check the power of regulatory agencies, ensuring they do not exceed their delegated authority.
However, the specific merits of disapproving the FTC rule depend on whether the rule itself is a reasonable exercise of the FTC's authority to regulate commerce and protect consumers. If the rule is deemed necessary to prevent fraud and deception, disapproving it could be seen as undermining the Constitution's implicit goal of promoting the general welfare.
Ultimately, the constitutionality of the resolution itself is not in question, but the wisdom of its application hinges on the specific details and justification of the FTC rule it seeks to overturn.
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).