S.148 - Regulations Evaluated to Determine The Anticipated Price and Effect Act; RED TAPE Act (119th Congress)
Summary
S.148, the RED TAPE Act, aims to prohibit the use of non-monetized or unqualified factors in regulatory analyses. It mandates that agencies prioritize quantifiable monetary benefits when making regulatory decisions. The bill amends Title 5 of the United States Code, adding a section that explicitly prohibits agencies and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) from considering non-monetized factors in regulatory impact analyses and benefit-cost analyses.
Expected Effects
The likely effect of this bill is a shift towards regulatory decisions based primarily on easily quantifiable economic factors. This could lead to a reduction in regulations that address issues with less tangible or immediate monetary benefits, such as environmental protection or social equity. The bill also introduces a judicial review process, allowing parties affected by rules that violate these provisions to challenge them in court.
Potential Benefits
- Increased Transparency: Requires agencies to publish regulatory impact and benefit-cost analyses, enhancing public understanding.
- Focus on Quantifiable Benefits: Prioritizes tangible, measurable financial benefits in regulatory decision-making.
- Reduced Regulatory Burden: Aims to minimize unnecessary regulatory costs on the public and private sectors.
- Judicial Review: Provides a mechanism for challenging rules that rely on non-monetized factors.
- Standardized Analysis: Promotes consistency in regulatory analysis by emphasizing monetized factors.
Potential Disadvantages
- Neglect of Non-Monetized Factors: May lead to the neglect of important but difficult-to-quantify factors like environmental quality or social well-being.
- Potential for Short-Sighted Decisions: Prioritizing immediate financial benefits could lead to decisions that are detrimental in the long term.
- Limited Scope of Analysis: Restricting analysis to monetized factors may oversimplify complex issues.
- Risk of Underestimating Costs: Some costs, such as health impacts, are difficult to accurately monetize.
- Reduced Flexibility: Limits the ability of agencies to consider a wide range of factors in regulatory decision-making.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's focus on regulatory analysis and its impact on economic factors does not directly implicate specific constitutional provisions. Congress has broad authority under Article I, Section 8 to regulate commerce and enact laws necessary and proper for carrying out its enumerated powers. The bill's provisions for judicial review align with the principle of checks and balances, ensuring that agency actions are subject to legal scrutiny. However, the emphasis on quantifiable benefits could potentially conflict with the government's responsibility to promote the general welfare, as outlined in the Preamble, if non-monetized factors are systematically ignored.
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).