Sponsors (94)
Want the plain-English version? I'll explain what this bill does.
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Adds a new subparagraph (E) to 2 U.S.C. 907(b)(2) stating that any rule subject to the congressional approval procedure in 5 U.S.C. §802 that affects budget authority, outlays, or receipts shall be assumed to be effective unless it is not approved pursuant to that procedure.
Amends chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to read as follows.
Requires that certain agency rules receive approval from Congress before taking effect, directs the Government Accountability Office to count currently effective rules and estimate their economic costs, and clarifies how rules that change budget authority are treated for budget scoring. It aims to increase congressional oversight of agency rulemaking and to produce a Congressional vote on rules that would otherwise take effect without direct legislative approval. Direct actions: (1) change the congressional review process for some or all agency rules so Congress must vote to approve them; (2) treat rules that affect budget authority as having budgetary effect unless disapproved by Congress; and (3) direct the Comptroller General to inventory in‑force rules and estimate their total economic cost and report back within one year.
States the purpose of the Act: to increase accountability for and transparency in the Federal regulatory process.
States that Section 1 of Article I of the United States Constitution grants all legislative powers to Congress.
States that, over time, Congress has excessively delegated its constitutional charge and has failed to conduct appropriate oversight and retain accountability for the content of the laws it passes.
States that the REINS Act will require a vote in Congress.
States the expected results of requiring a congressional vote under the REINS Act: more carefully drafted and detailed legislation, an improved regulatory process, and a legislative branch that is truly accountable to the American people for the laws imposed upon them.
Who is affected and how:
Federal agencies and agency rulewriters: They would face a new procedural hurdle. Rules that would previously be finalized and take effect under existing administrative timelines may be delayed, altered, or blocked if congressional approval is required. Agencies would likely need to redesign regulatory timetables, compliance planning, and stakeholder outreach to account for congressional consideration.
Regulated entities and businesses: Companies and organizations subject to federal rules would face more uncertainty and potential delay in regulatory implementation. Some industries could benefit if unfavorable rules are blocked; others could be harmed if needed health, safety, or environmental protections are delayed. Compliance planning and legal strategies may shift toward lobbying Congress rather than only engaging in notice‑and‑comment rulemaking or litigation.
Congress and congressional staff: Workload would increase substantially. Committees and floor calendars would need to accommodate consideration of rules that previously bypassed full congressional votes. Congressional staff and legislative drafters would play a larger role in vetting technical regulatory details.
The public and consumers: Outcomes depend on congressional action. Increased scrutiny may improve transparency for some rules, but added delays could postpone consumer protections or public‑health measures. Political dynamics could shape which rules advance, introducing greater partisan influence over regulatory outcomes.
Budget and fiscal actors: The measure that treats rules affecting budget authority as having budgetary effect (unless disapproved) alters how such rules are counted for budget scoring and could affect the congressional budget process and fiscal estimates.
Courts and legal practitioners: Litigation strategies may shift. If more substantive decisions require congressional approval, challengers may bring new constitutional and procedural claims, and the nature of administrative law disputes could change.
Overall, the bill reallocates a material portion of regulatory decisionmaking from agencies and independent review to Congress, increasing legislative control but also raising the potential for delay, politicization, and heavier congressional workload. The lack of the replacement Title 5 language in the provided materials, and the absence of explicit effective‑date language, leaves important implementation details uncertain.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, and the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced January 3, 2025 by Kat Cammack · Last progress January 3, 2025
Saving Privacy Act
Saving Privacy Act
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, and the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
