Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when HR 3010 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on HR 3010.
You're tracking HR 3010
We'll email you the moment it moves.
HR 3010 — Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011
Last action — Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
Died in session
This bill died with 112th Congress. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011 - (Sec. 2) Defines "major rule" and "major guidance" for purposes of this Act as a rule or guidance that is likely to impose: (1) an annual cost on the economy of $100 million or more, adjusted annually for inflation; (2) a major increase in costs or prices; (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S. enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises; or (4) significant impacts on multiple sectors of the economy. Defines "high-impact rule" as a rule that is likely to have an annual cost on the economy of $1 billion or more, adjusted annually for inflation. (Sec. 3) Revises procedures for rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to require a federal agency, in the rulemaking process, to make all preliminary and final factual determinations based on evidence and to consider: (1) the legal authority under which a rule may be proposed, (2) the specific nature and significance of the problem the agency may address with a rule, (3) whether existing rules have created or contributed to the problem the agency may address with a rule and whether such rules may be amended or rescinded, (4) any reasonable alternatives for a new rule, and (5) the potential costs and benefits associated with potential alternative rules. Revises rulemaking notice requirements to require an agency to: (1) publish in the Federal Register advance notice of proposed rulemaking involving a major or high-impact rule that involves a novel legal or policy issue arising out of statutory mandates; (2) consult with the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) before issuing a proposed rule and after the issuance of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking; (3) provide interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process; (4) hold a hearing before the adoption of any high-impact rule; (5) expand requirements for the adoption of a final rule, including requiring that the agency adopt a rule only on the basis of the best evidence and at the least cost; and (6) grant any interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule. Specifies the minimum amount of information that must be included in an advance notice. Requires the Administrator to issue guidelines to promote coordination, simplification, and harmonization of agency rules during the rulemaking process Exempts from such revised procedures rulemakings that concern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee. (Sec. 4) Imposes new requirements for issuing any major guidance or guidance that involves a novel legal or policy issue arising out of statutory mandates. Authorizes the Administrator to issue guidelines for agencies in issuing major guidance or other guidance. (Sec. 5) Provides for electronic access to transcripts of testimony and exhibits and other papers filed in a rulemaking proceeding. Requires the record of decision in a rulemaking proceeding to include information from a hearing under the Information Quality Act or on a high-impact rule. Requires an agency to grant a petition for a hearing in the case of a major rule, unless the agency reasonably determines that a hearing would not advance consideration of the rule or would unreasonably delay completion of the rulemaking. Exempts from this requirement rulemakings that concern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee. (Sec. 6) Provides that an agency's denial of an Information Quality Act petition, or a failure to grant or deny such petition within 90 days, is reviewable by a court as a final action. Allows immediate judicial review of interim rules, other than in cases involving national security interests, issued without compliance with the notice requirements of this Act. (Sec. 7) Revises standards for the scope of judicial review of agency rulemaking to prohibit a court from deferring to an agency's: (1) interpretation of a rule if the agency did not comply with APA requirements, (2) determination of the costs and benefits or other economic or risk assessment if the agency failed to conform to guidelines on such determinations and assessments established by the Administrator, (3) determinations made in the adoption of an interim rule, or (4) guidance. (Sec. 8) Defines "substantial evidence" for purposes of evaluating agency adjudications and for rulemaking under APA as such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion in light of the record considered as a whole, taking into account whatever in the record fairly detracts from the weight of the evidence relied upon by the agency to support its decision. (Sec. 9) Provides that the amendments made by this Act to specified provisions of federal law shall not apply to any rule makings pending or completed on the enactment date of this Act.
Bill Text
We don't have the full text on file for this bill yet.
Read HR 3010 on the official United States source →Action History
-
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
-
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
-
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 253 - 167 (Roll no. 888).
-
On motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 186 - 233 (Roll no. 887). (consideration: CR H8105)
-
The previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H8104)
-
DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Boswell motion to recommit with instructions. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment that stipulates the provisions in this Act shall not apply to new regulations or the revision of existing regulations that reduce costs or increase coverage for pharmaceuticals and other health services for seniors, or efforts by the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Veterans Administration, and Defense to negotiate lower prescription drug prices.
-
Mr. Boswell moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary. (consideration: CR H8103-8105; text: CR H8103)
-
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H8103)
-
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of committee amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H8088-8092)
-
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3010.
-
H.AMDT.893 On agreeing to the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment (A006) Failed by recorded vote: 175 - 247 (Roll no. 886).
-
H.AMDT.892 On agreeing to the Nadler amendment (A005) Failed by recorded vote: 174 - 247 (Roll no. 885).
-
H.AMDT.891 On agreeing to the Connolly (VA) amendment (A004) Failed by recorded vote: 171 - 242 (Roll no. 884).
-
H.AMDT.890 On agreeing to the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment (A003) Failed by recorded vote: 162 - 250 (Roll no. 883).
-
H.AMDT.888 On agreeing to the Moore amendment (A001) Failed by recorded vote: 187 - 232 (Roll no. 882).
-
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 7, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 7.
-
H.AMDT.893 Amendment (A006) offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (TX). (consideration: CR H8097-8099, H8102; text: CR H8097)Amendment sought to exempt all rules promulgated by the Department of Homeland Security from the provisions of the bill.
-
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Nadler amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Smith (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Nadler amendment.
-
H.AMDT.892 Amendment (A005) offered by Mr. Nadler. (consideration: CR H8096-8097, H8101-8102; text: CR H8096)Amendment sought to exempt actions by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under the Atomic Energy Act from the provisions of the bill.
-
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Connolly amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Smith (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Connolly (VA) amendment.
-
H.AMDT.891 Amendment (A004) offered by Mr. Connolly (VA). (consideration: CR H8095-8096, H8100-8101; text: CR H8095)Amendment sought to clarify that regulations to protect public health and safety would not be blocked or repealed by H.R. 3010.
-
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 3, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Smith (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee amendment No. 3.
-
H.AMDT.890 Amendment (A003) offered by Ms. Jackson Lee (TX). (consideration: CR H8093-8095, H8100; text: CR H8093)Amendment sought to clarify that the agency would retain the discretion to determine whether to provide advance notice, not later than 90 days, of a proposed rule prior to it being published in the Federal Register.
-
H.AMDT.889 On agreeing to the Olson amendment (A002) Agreed to by voice vote.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Olson amendment.
-
H.AMDT.889 Amendment (A002) offered by Mr. Olson. (consideration: CR H8093; text: CR H8093)Amendment clarified that when making a rule, an agency shall not only consider potential costs and benefits associated with such proposed rule (including direct, indirect, cumulative costs and benefits and estimated impacts on American jobs), but shall also estimate the net gain or loss in domestic jobs.
-
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Moore amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced that the noes had prevailed. Ms. Moore demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
-
DEBATE - Pursuant to the the provisions of H.Res. 477, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Moore amendment.
-
H.AMDT.888 Amendment (A001) offered by Ms. Moore. (consideration: CR H8092-8093, H8099-8100; text: CR H8092)Amendment sought to clarify that an agency shall take into account whether a problem disproportionately impacts certain vulnerable subpopulations (including veterans, low-income individuals and families, and the elderly), and whether such an impact would be mitigated by new agency action.
-
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3010.
-
The Speaker designated the Honorable Steve Womack to act as Chairman of the Committee.
-
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 477 and Rule XVIII.
-
Measure provides for consideration of H.R. 3463 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; bill is closed to amendments. Provides for consideration of H.R. 527 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; specified amendments are in order. Provides for consideration of H.R. 3010 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; specified amendments are in order.
-
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 477. (consideration: CR H8081-8105)
-
Rule H. Res. 477 passed House.
-
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 477 Reported to House. Measure provides for consideration of H.R. 3463 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; bill is closed to amendments. Provides for consideration of H.R. 527 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; specified amendments are in order. Provides for consideration of H.R. 3010 with one hour of general debate, equally divided and controlled; specified amendments are in order.
-
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 195.
-
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-294.
-
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 16 - 6.
-
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
-
Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law Discharged.
-
Committee Hearings Held.
-
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
-
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsors
- Lamar Smith · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 546 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (546)
546 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 546 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does HR 3010 do?
- Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011 - (Sec. 2) Defines "major rule" and "major guidance" for purposes of this Act as a rule or guidance that is likely to impose: (1) an annual cost on the economy of $100 million or more, adjusted annually for inflation; (2) a major increase in costs or prices; (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S. enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises; or (4) significant impacts on multiple sectors of the economy. Defines "high-impact rule" as a rule that is likely to have an annual cost on the economy of $1 billion or more, adjusted annually for inflation. (Sec. 3) Revises procedures for rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to require a federal agency, in the rulemaking process, to make all preliminary and final factual determinations based on evidence and to consider: (1) the legal authority under which a rule may be proposed, (2) the specific nature and significance of the problem the agency may address with a rule, (3) whether existing rules have created or contributed to the problem the agency may address with a rule and whether such rules may be amended or rescinded, (4) any reasonable alternatives for a new rule, and (5) the potential costs and benefits associated with potential alternative rules. Revises rulemaking notice requirements to require an agency to: (1) publish in the Federal Register advance notice of proposed rulemaking involving a major or high-impact rule that involves a novel legal or policy issue arising out of statutory mandates; (2) consult with the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) before issuing a proposed rule and after the issuance of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking; (3) provide interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process; (4) hold a hearing before the adoption of any high-impact rule; (5) expand requirements for the adoption of a final rule, including requiring that the agency adopt a rule only on the basis of the best evidence and at the least cost; and (6) grant any interested person the right to petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule. Specifies the minimum amount of information that must be included in an advance notice. Requires the Administrator to issue guidelines to promote coordination, simplification, and harmonization of agency rules during the rulemaking process Exempts from such revised procedures rulemakings that concern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee. (Sec. 4) Imposes new requirements for issuing any major guidance or guidance that involves a novel legal or policy issue arising out of statutory mandates. Authorizes the Administrator to issue guidelines for agencies in issuing major guidance or other guidance. (Sec. 5) Provides for electronic access to transcripts of testimony and exhibits and other papers filed in a rulemaking proceeding. Requires the record of decision in a rulemaking proceeding to include information from a hearing under the Information Quality Act or on a high-impact rule. Requires an agency to grant a petition for a hearing in the case of a major rule, unless the agency reasonably determines that a hearing would not advance consideration of the rule or would unreasonably delay completion of the rulemaking. Exempts from this requirement rulemakings that concern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee. (Sec. 6) Provides that an agency's denial of an Information Quality Act petition, or a failure to grant or deny such petition within 90 days, is reviewable by a court as a final action. Allows immediate judicial review of interim rules, other than in cases involving national security interests, issued without compliance with the notice requirements of this Act. (Sec. 7) Revises standards for the scope of judicial review of agency rulemaking to prohibit a court from deferring to an agency's: (1) interpretation of a rule if the agency did not comply with APA requirements, (2) determination of the costs and benefits or other economic or risk assessment if the agency failed to conform to guidelines on such determinations and assessments established by the Administrator, (3) determinations made in the adoption of an interim rule, or (4) guidance. (Sec. 8) Defines "substantial evidence" for purposes of evaluating agency adjudications and for rulemaking under APA as such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion in light of the record considered as a whole, taking into account whatever in the record fairly detracts from the weight of the evidence relied upon by the agency to support its decision. (Sec. 9) Provides that the amendments made by this Act to specified provisions of federal law shall not apply to any rule makings pending or completed on the enactment date of this Act.
- Who sponsors HR 3010?
- HR 3010 is sponsored by Lamar Smith (R).
- What is the current status of HR 3010?
- This bill died with 112th Congress. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track HR 3010?
- Track HR 3010 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on HR 3010
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of HR 3010
Last checked for changes about 10 hours ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →