Sponsors (2)
The bill increases transparency, analytic rigor, and stakeholder participation in major federal rulemaking, but does so at the cost of slower rule issuance, higher administrative burdens, and greater centralization of review that may undervalue non‑monetized harms and invite politicization or litigation.
Taxpayers, small businesses, and state/local/Tribal governments will get earlier, clearer, and quantified benefit–cost analyses and public disclosure for major federal rules, improving transparency about economic and safety tradeoffs.
State, local, Tribal governments, small businesses, nonprofits, and other stakeholders gain earlier and broader opportunities to review, consult on, and propose alternatives before major rules are finalized, increasing participation and chances to reduce duplicative or costly requirements.
Taxpayers and businesses are more likely to face fewer inefficient or overly costly regulations because agencies are required to select regulatory alternatives that maximize quantified net benefits (within statutory scope) and must document departures, raising analytic rigor.
All Americans (especially taxpayers and consumers) may see slower issuance of major rules and delayed regulatory responses — including protections for health, safety, or the environment — because of added procedural steps, analyses, and review requirements.
Agencies will face substantial additional administrative and compliance costs (preparing analyses, extended consultations, annual reports, and dockets), costs that can be borne by taxpayers or passed to regulated entities and may divert agency resources from program delivery.
Centralizing authority and approval in OIRA increases the risk that regulatory decisions become politicized and reduces agencies' independent policymaking discretion.
Based on analysis of 10 sections of legislative text.
Tightens UMRA by defining "major rule," requiring detailed impact analyses and consultations, increasing OIRA oversight, adding pre‑proposal notices, and enabling judicial review for major‑rule compliance.
Introduced March 19, 2026 by Debra Fischer · Last progress March 19, 2026
Rewrites major parts of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act to tighten how federal agencies define and analyze “major rules,” expand and formalize consultation with state, local, and Tribal officials and affected private parties, and give the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) stronger oversight and reporting duties. It requires agencies to prepare detailed initial and final regulatory impact analyses, choose the regulatory alternative that maximizes net benefits (within the statute authorizing the rule) unless OIRA approves a justified departure, create an early electronic docket and publication before proposing major rules, and makes major-rule compliance subject to judicial review. Key provisions take effect 120 days after enactment for the principal definitional, consultation, OIRA oversight, and analysis requirements; other provisions do not specify a different effective date. The bill also removes a carve-out for certain independent agencies from one budget-rule provision while exempting Federal Reserve monetary policy actions from the Act’s titles II–IV coverage.