Dozens of consumer advocacy, environmental and business groups endorsed the legislation.
The 844-page Senate bill would remake U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services's citizenship office as the “Office of Citizenship and New Americans.”
Rep. Duffy said if "community banks can't get dollars out the door" the whole community suffers.
House Republicans pressed forward with legislation meant to weaken the president’s authority to preserve lands via the century-old Antiquities Act.
A new bill to stop court-ordered informal regulations could potentially gain bipartisan support, sponsor Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.) said Friday.
Collins told The Hill that he hopes the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act could be voted on as a stand-alone piece of legislation.
“It goes back to transparency; it goes back to [being] a fairness issue,” he said. “If you want to argue against that. ... That's a harder argument to have, stand-alone.”
The bill, introduced on Thursday, would stop “pro-regulatory” interest groups from suing agencies and forcing them to issue regulations under a court order without first going through normal regulatory procedure of seeking public comment.
Fifty-four business organizations pushed Congress on Thursday to abandon a controversial rule-making process they claim uses the courts to avoid regulatory transparency.
The organizations, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, sent a letter to members of the Senate and House Judiciary committees urging them to consider a bill to prohibit the “sue and settle” process.
Under this process, groups — often consumer or environmental advocacy organizations — file a lawsuit against the federal government for failing to meet a regulatory deadline or requirement.
A bill that would give Congress veto power over major regulations advanced in the House on Thursday.
In a 20-9 vote, the House Judiciary Committee approved the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, which would allow for congressional oversight of regulations with an economic impact of $100 million or more.
Originally introduced in 2011, the REINS Act passed the House last year but went nowhere in the Senate. Rep. Todd Young (R-Ind.) sponsored the latest version, which has picked up 148 co-sponsors, all from the GOP.
Opponents of the REINS Act say Congress should butt out of the regulatory process and leave the work to the experts who staff federal agencies.
The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday voted down an amendment to a regulations bill that would have exempted gun control rules from congressional review.
The amendment was proposed by Democrats during a markup of the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act.
Rep. Judy Chu (D-Calif.) introduced the add-on during a committee markup on Wednesday and began to read a 41-page document listing all the school shootings in the United States since 1997.
“The REINS Act would create yet another barrier to protecting our schools and children,” Chu said.
Tensions were high on Thursday as the House Judiciary Committee considered an amendment to GOP legislation that would give Congress the power to review major rules.
The Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act was a GOP favorite during the last Congress, and its reintroduction in January has already attracted 148 co-sponsors, all of which are Republican.
Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.) introduced two amendments during the House Judiciary Committee markup of the bill, which were eventually combined. The amendment — which failed in a 17-15 vote — would have exempted regulations from the Dodd-Frank financial reform law from congressional review, including rules drafted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
Watt said the complex financial rules should not face “micromanagement” from Congress. “This is a preview of what’s to come” if Congress obtains the powers outlined in the REINS Act, he said during a spirited exchange with Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Ala.).
An association of workplace safety professionals is supporting legislation to develop comprehensive regulations for exploding dust that has killed scores of workers.
At issue is so-called combustible dust, finely ground material that can ignite and explode.
According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), "Any combustible material can burn rapidly when in a finely divided form. If such a dust is suspended in air in the right concentration, under certain conditions, it can become explosible. Even materials that do not burn in larger pieces (such as aluminum or iron), given the proper conditions, can be explosible in dust form."