CONGRESS FOR VOTERS

RepublicanBill · H.R. 3058· House(119-HR-3058)

Reclaim the Reins Act

Rep. Cammack
Age: 38 years
Florida
Introduced
4/29/2025
Last activity
4/29/2025 — Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, 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.
Sponsored by
Kat Cammack
Cosponsors
None
Government Operations and Politics
  1. Introduced
  2. In Committee

What this bill would do

This bill, called the "Reclaim the Reins Act," aims to increase congressional oversight of agency rulemaking by requiring more detailed reports on the potential effects of new rules and giving Congress more power to approve or disapprove major rules, especially those that increase revenue. It also mandates a review of existing rules. The bill allocates $10 million each to the Office of Management and Budget and the Comptroller General to carry out these new responsibilities.

Potential Positive Impacts for People

  • Increased Transparency in Rulemaking (Sec. 2(c)(1)): The bill requires agencies to provide more detailed information about the potential impacts of new rules, including budgetary effects, costs, job impacts, and effects on inflation. This could help the public better understand the potential consequences of proposed regulations.

  • More Congressional Oversight (Sec. 2(c)(1)): The bill strengthens Congress's ability to review and potentially block major rules, especially those that increase revenues. This could lead to more accountability in the rulemaking process and prevent the implementation of regulations that are not in the public's best interest.

  • Review of Existing Rules (Sec. 2(c)(1)): Agencies must review at least 20% of their existing rules annually for 4 years and submit reports similar to new rules. This could lead to the elimination or modification of outdated or ineffective regulations.

Potential Negative Impacts for People

  • Delays in Implementing Needed Regulations (Sec. 2(c)(1)): The bill's additional review requirements and the need for congressional approval of major rules could slow down the implementation of new regulations, even those that are beneficial.

  • Potential for Political Gridlock (Sec. 2(c)(1)): Increased congressional involvement in rulemaking could lead to political gridlock, making it difficult to enact necessary regulations, especially if Congress is divided.

  • Uncertainty for Businesses (Sec. 2(c)(1)): The annual review of existing rules and the possibility of those rules being sunsetted if not approved by Congress could create uncertainty for businesses that rely on those regulations.

Yes· 3 of 15

  • Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+5

    Mandates significantly more detailed reporting on the costs, effects, and legal authority of agency rules.

  • Would business owners be better off under this?+4

    Reduces the likelihood of unexpected and costly federal regulations through increased congressional oversight.

  • Would farmers be better off under this?+3

    Agricultural producers are often heavily impacted by agency rules; increased oversight may reduce burdensome regulations.

The opposite· 3 of 9

  • Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?-3

    The bill creates significant hurdles for agencies to implement new protective regulations and potentially sunsets existing ones.

  • Does this put more rules on large technology companies?-3

    The bill's constraints on rulemaking would make it harder for agencies to implement new regulations on tech companies.

  • Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change?-2

    Increased difficulty in enacting new environmental regulations may slow carbon reduction efforts.