Yet another unconstitutional bill......

[tics]

The REINS act.........sigh.....when will the abuse of power end in Congress?

WASHINGTON -- A bill that would give the controlling party of either chamber of Congress veto power over any major new regulation passed the House of Representatives Wednesday.

The measure, dubbed the Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny -- or REINS -- Act, would require Congress to sign off on any new rule estimated to cost more than $100 million. It passed 241 to 184, with a handful of Democrats crossing the aisle.

The REINS Act is only the latest of a slew of bills aimed at peeling back regulations, which House Republicans have pushed for in the name of cutting red tape and freeing up businesses. The GOP sees the regulations as overbearing rulemaking by unelected bureaucrats.

"Who do the regulators answer to? No one," said Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) in debate on the House floor.

"When the regulators go to work everyday, like most people go to work, their work assignment's a little different," Poe said. "In my opinion, they sit around a big oak table, sipping their lattes. They have out their iPads and their computers, and they decide, 'Who shall we regulate today?' And they write a regulation and send it out to the masses and make us deal with the cost to that."

Rep. Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.), argued that if Congress can stop rules in their tracks, businesses will flourish.

"Poll after poll of small business owners, of medium-sized business owners -- they will show you and tell you that major regulations are holding back their expansion and the ability of them to hire more workers," Quayle said.

The bill would effectively give either chamber a veto on a regulation because leaders could simply not put it on the calendar for a vote, and the rule would expire after 70 congressional working days.

The Senate is unlikely to pass the measure.

Opponents of the bill argue that there is actually no evidence that regulation is a drag on the economy. Although REINS advocates frequently point to an estimate that regulations cost business more than $1 trillion a year, opponents point to a recent report from the Congressional Budget Office that found the benefits of regulations often outweigh their costs by spurring economic activity.

Environmental advocates have been especially alarmed about the REINS Act because many environmental regulations fall into the "major" category, with their impact often exceeding $100 million in cost. They fear the measure is simply a way to let the Tea Party and special interests shoot down any new rule to protect the air and water.

The Act's opponents also note that it's ironic the GOP legislative attempt comes during an administration that has promoted fewer regulations that the previous one, and that the regulations Congress wants to block stem from laws passed by Congress itself.

Democrats cast the entire exercise as a partisan distraction from attempts to do something about the economy, including extending a payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits that run out at the end of the year.

"Christmas is coming, the goose is getting fat -- please to put a dollar in the workers' hand," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said. "I urge my colleagues to vote no on this REINS Act, and to get to work to extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance for the American people."

"Only then will we increase demand in our economy, create jobs, promote economic growth and put money into the pockets of 160 million Americans," Pelosi said. "Think of the difference that will make instead of putting forth legislation that has no impact on our economic growth is not in furtherance of job creation."

Spoiler for Hiden:

112TH CONGRESS
1ST SESSION
H. R. 10
To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide that major
rules of the executive branch shall have no force or effect unless a
joint resolution of approval is enacted into law.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JANUARY 20, 2011
Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. AKIN, Mr.
BACHUS, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. BERG, Mr. BISHOP
of Utah, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BONNER, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY
of Texas, Mr. BUCSHON, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CALVERT, Mr.
CAMP, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mr. FARENTHOLD,
Mr. FLORES, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona,
Mr. GALLEGLY, Mr. GARDNER, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. GIBBS,
Mr. GIBSON, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. GOWDY, Mr. GUTHRIE, Ms.
HAYWORTH, Mr. HELLER, Mr. HERGER, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. ISSA, Ms.
JENKINS, Mr. JONES, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KINZINGER
of Illinois, Mr. KLINE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LEE of New York,
Mrs. LUMMIS, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Mr.
MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mrs.
MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. MULVANEY, Mr.
MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mr. NUNES, Mr.
NUNNELEE, Mr. PAUL, Mr. PEARCE, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. POSEY, Mr.
PRICE of Georgia, Mr. QUAYLE, Mr. REICHERT, Mr. ROE of Tennessee,
Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROKITA, Mr. ROSKAM, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mr.
SCHOCK, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina,
Mr. SESSIONS, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SMITH of Nebraska, Mr. STUTZMAN,
Mr. TERRY, Mr. TIPTON, Mr. UPTON, Mr. WALDEN, Mr. WEST, Mr.
WILSON of South Carolina, and Mr. WITTMAN) introduced the following
bill; which was 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
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6652 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS2
•HR 10 IH
A BILL
To amend chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, to provide
that major rules of the executive branch shall have no
force or effect unless a joint resolution of approval is
enacted into law.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Regulations From the
5 Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2011’’.
6 SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
7 The purpose of this Act is to increase accountability
8 for and transparency in the federal regulatory process.
9 Section 1 of article I of the United States Constitution
10 grants all legislative powers to Congress. Over time, Con-
11 gress has excessively delegated its constitutional charge
12 while failing to conduct appropriate oversight and retain
13 accountability for the content of the laws it passes. By
14 requiring a vote in Congress, the REINS Act will result
15 in more carefully drafted and detailed legislation, an im-
16 proved regulatory process, and a legislative branch that
17 is truly accountable to the American people for the laws
18 imposed upon them.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS3
•HR 10 IH
1 SEC. 3. CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF AGENCY RULE-
2 MAKING.
3 Chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, is amended
4 to read as follows:
5 ‘‘CHAPTER 8—CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW
6 OF AGENCY RULEMAKING
‘‘Sec.
‘‘801. Congressional review.
‘‘802. Congressional approval procedure for major rules.
‘‘803. Congressional disapproval procedure for nonmajor rules.
‘‘804. Definitions.
‘‘805. Judicial review.
‘‘806. Exemption for monetary policy.
‘‘807. Effective date of certain rules.
7 ‘‘§ 801. Congressional review
8 ‘‘(a)(1)(A) Before a rule may take effect, the Federal
9 agency promulgating such rule shall submit to each House
10 of the Congress and to the Comptroller General a report
11 containing—
12 ‘‘(i) a copy of the rule;
13 ‘‘(ii) a concise general statement relating to the
14 rule;
15 ‘‘(iii) a classification of the rule as a major or
16 nonmajor rule, including an explanation of the clas-
17 sification specifically addressing each criteria for a
18 major rule contained within sections 804(2)(A),
19 804(2)(B), and 804(2)(C);
20 ‘‘(iv) a list of any other related regulatory ac-
21 tions intended to implement the same statutory proVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS4
•HR 10 IH
1 vision or regulatory objective as well as the indi-
2 vidual and aggregate economic effects of those ac-
3 tions; and
4 ‘‘(v) the proposed effective date of the rule.
5 ‘‘(B) On the date of the submission of the report
6 under subparagraph (A), the Federal agency promulgating
7 the rule shall submit to the Comptroller General and make
8 available to each House of Congress—
9 ‘‘(i) a complete copy of the cost-benefit analysis
10 of the rule, if any;
11 ‘‘(ii) the agency’s actions pursuant to title 5 of
12 the United States Code, sections 603, 604, 605,
13 607, and 609;
14 ‘‘(iii) the agency’s actions pursuant to title 2 of
15 the United States Code, sections 1532, 1533, 1534,
16 and 1535; and
17 ‘‘(iv) any other relevant information or require-
18 ments under any other Act and any relevant Execu-
19 tive orders.
20 ‘‘(C) Upon receipt of a report submitted under sub-
21 paragraph (A), each House shall provide copies of the re-
22 port to the chairman and ranking member of each stand-
23 ing committee with jurisdiction under the rules of the
24 House of Representatives or the Senate to report a bill
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS5
•HR 10 IH
1 to amend the provision of law under which the rule is
2 issued.
3 ‘‘(2)(A) The Comptroller General shall provide a re-
4 port on each major rule to the committees of jurisdiction
5 by the end of 15 calendar days after the submission or
6 publication date as provided in section 802(b)(2). The re-
7 port of the Comptroller General shall include an assess-
8 ment of the agency’s compliance with procedural steps re-
9 quired by paragraph (1)(B).
10 ‘‘(B) Federal agencies shall cooperate with the Comp-
11 troller General by providing information relevant to the
12 Comptroller General’s report under subparagraph (A).
13 ‘‘(3) A major rule relating to a report submitted
14 under paragraph (1) shall take effect upon enactment of
15 a joint resolution of approval described in section 802 or
16 as provided for in the rule following enactment of a joint
17 resolution of approval described in section 802, whichever
18 is later.
19 ‘‘(4) A nonmajor rule shall take effect as provided
20 by section 803 after submission to Congress under para-
21 graph (1).
22 ‘‘(5) If a joint resolution of approval relating to a
23 major rule is not enacted within the period provided in
24 subsection (b)(2), then a joint resolution of approval relat-
25 ing to the same rule may not be considered under this
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS6
•HR 10 IH
1 chapter in the same Congress by either the House of Rep-
2 resentatives or the Senate.
3 ‘‘(b)(1) A major rule shall not take effect unless the
4 Congress enacts a joint resolution of approval described
5 under section 802.
6 ‘‘(2) If a joint resolution described in subsection (a)
7 is not enacted into law by the end of 70 session days or
8 legislative days, as applicable, beginning on the date on
9 which the report referred to in section 801(a)(1)(A) is re-
10 ceived by Congress (excluding days either House of Con-
11 gress is adjourned for more than 3 days during a session
12 of Congress), then the rule described in that resolution
13 shall be deemed not to be approved and such rule shall
14 not take effect.
15 ‘‘(c)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
16 section (except subject to paragraph (3)), a major rule
17 may take effect for one 90-calendar-day period if the
18 President makes a determination under paragraph (2) and
19 submits written notice of such determination to the Con-
20 gress.
21 ‘‘(2) Paragraph (1) applies to a determination made
22 by the President by Executive order that the major rule
23 should take effect because such rule is—
24 ‘‘(A) necessary because of an imminent threat
25 to health or safety or other emergency;
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS7
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(B) necessary for the enforcement of criminal
2 laws;
3 ‘‘(C) necessary for national security; or
4 ‘‘(D) issued pursuant to any statute imple-
5 menting an international trade agreement.
6 ‘‘(3) An exercise by the President of the authority
7 under this subsection shall have no effect on the proce-
8 dures under section 802.
9 ‘‘(d)(1) In addition to the opportunity for review oth-
10 erwise provided under this chapter, in the case of any rule
11 for which a report was submitted in accordance with sub-
12 section (a)(1)(A) during the period beginning on the date
13 occurring—
14 ‘‘(A) in the case of the Senate, 60 session days,
15 or
16 ‘‘(B) in the case of the House of Representa-
17 tives, 60 legislative days,
18 before the date the Congress is scheduled to adjourn a
19 session of Congress through the date on which the same
20 or succeeding Congress first convenes its next session, sec-
21 tions 802 and 803 shall apply to such rule in the suc-
22 ceeding session of Congress.
23 ‘‘(2)(A) In applying sections 802 and 803 for pur-
24 poses of such additional review, a rule described under
25 paragraph (1) shall be treated as though—
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS8
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(i) such rule were published in the Federal
2 Register on—
3 ‘‘(I) in the case of the Senate, the 15th
4 session day, or
5 ‘‘(II) in the case of the House of Rep-
6 resentatives, the 15th legislative day,
7 after the succeeding session of Congress first con-
8 venes; and
9 ‘‘(ii) a report on such rule were submitted to
10 Congress under subsection (a)(1) on such date.
11 ‘‘(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed
12 to affect the requirement under subsection (a)(1) that a
13 report shall be submitted to Congress before a rule can
14 take effect.
15 ‘‘(3) A rule described under paragraph (1) shall take
16 effect as otherwise provided by law (including other sub-
17 sections of this section).
18 ‘‘§ 802. Congressional approval procedure for major
19 rules
20 ‘‘(a) For purposes of this section, the term ‘joint res-
21 olution’ means only a joint resolution introduced on or
22 after the date on which the report referred to in section
23 801(a)(1)(A) is received by Congress (excluding days ei-
24 ther House of Congress is adjourned for more than 3 days
25 during a session of Congress), the matter after the resolvVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS9
•HR 10 IH
1 ing clause of which is as follows: ‘That Congress approves
2 the rule submitted by the l l  relating to l l.’ (The
3 blank spaces being appropriately filled in).
4 ‘‘(1) In the House, the majority leader of the
5 House of Representatives (or his designee) and the
6 minority leader of the House of Representatives (or
7 his designee) shall introduce such joint resolution
8 described in subsection (a) (by request), within 3
9 legislative days after Congress receives the report re-
10 ferred to in section 801(a)(1)(A).
11 ‘‘(2) In the Senate, the majority leader of the
12 Senate (or his designee) and the minority leader of
13 the Senate (or his designee) shall introduce such
14 joint resolution described in subsection (a) (by re-
15 quest), within 3 session days after Congress receives
16 the report referred to in section 801(a)(1)(A).
17 ‘‘(b)(1) A joint resolution described in subsection (a)
18 shall be referred to the committees in each House of Con-
19 gress with jurisdiction under the rules of the House of
20 Representatives or the Senate to report a bill to amend
21 the provision of law under which the rule is issued.
22 ‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, the term ‘submis-
23 sion date’ means the date on which the Congress receives
24 the report submitted under section 801(a)(1).
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS10
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(c) In the Senate, if the committee or committees
2 to which a joint resolution described in subsection (a) has
3 been referred have not reported it at the end of 15 session
4 days after its introduction, such committee or committees
5 shall be automatically discharged from further consider-
6 ation of the resolution and it shall be placed on the cal-
7 endar. A vote on final passage of the resolution shall be
8 taken on or before the close of the 15th session day after
9 the resolution is reported by the committee or committees
10 to which it was referred, or after such committee or com-
11 mittees have been discharged from further consideration
12 of the resolution.
13 ‘‘(d)(1) In the Senate, when the committee or com-
14 mittees to which a joint resolution is referred have re-
15 ported, or when a committee or committees are discharged
16 (under subsection (c)) from further consideration of a
17 joint resolution described in subsection (a), it is at any
18 time thereafter in order (even though a previous motion
19 to the same effect has been disagreed to) for a motion
20 to proceed to the consideration of the joint resolution, and
21 all points of order against the joint resolution (and against
22 consideration of the joint resolution) are waived. The mo-
23 tion is not subject to amendment, or to a motion to post-
24 pone, or to a motion to proceed to the consideration of
25 other business. A motion to reconsider the vote by which
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS11
•HR 10 IH
1 the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall not be in
2 order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration of the
3 joint resolution is agreed to, the joint resolution shall re-
4 main the unfinished business of the Senate until disposed
5 of.
6 ‘‘(2) In the Senate, debate on the joint resolution,
7 and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
8 therewith, shall be limited to not more than 2 hours, which
9 shall be divided equally between those favoring and those
10 opposing the joint resolution. A motion to further limit
11 debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment to,
12 or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to the
13 consideration of other business, or a motion to recommit
14 the joint resolution is not in order.
15 ‘‘(3) In the Senate, immediately following the conclu-
16 sion of the debate on a joint resolution described in sub-
17 section (a), and a single quorum call at the conclusion of
18 the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the
19 Senate, the vote on final passage of the joint resolution
20 shall occur.
21 ‘‘(4) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating
22 to the application of the rules of the Senate to the proce-
23 dure relating to a joint resolution described in subsection
24 (a) shall be decided without debate.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS12
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(e)(1) In the House of Representatives, if the com-
2 mittee or committees to which a joint resolution described
3 in subsection (a) has been referred have not reported it
4 at the end of 15 legislative days after its introduction,
5 such committee or committees shall be automatically dis-
6 charged from further consideration of the resolution and
7 it shall be placed on the appropriate calendar. A vote on
8 final passage of the resolution shall be taken on or before
9 the close of the 15th legislative day after the resolution
10 is reported by the committee or committees to which it
11 was referred, or after such committee or committees have
12 been discharged from further consideration of the resolu-
13 tion.
14 ‘‘(2)(A) A motion in the House of Representatives to
15 proceed to the consideration of a resolution shall be privi-
16 leged and not debatable. An amendment to the motion
17 shall not be in order, nor shall it be in order to move to
18 reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or
19 disagreed to.
20 ‘‘(B) Debate in the House of Representatives on a
21 resolution shall be limited to not more than two hours,
22 which shall be divided equally between those favoring and
23 those opposing the resolution. A motion to further limit
24 debate shall not be debatable. No amendment to, or mo-
25 tion to recommit, the resolution shall be in order. It shall
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS13
•HR 10 IH
1 not be in order to reconsider the vote by which a resolution
2 is agreed to or disagreed to.
3 ‘‘(C) Motions to postpone, made in the House of Rep-
4 resentatives with respect to the consideration of a resolu-
5 tion, and motions to proceed to the consideration of other
6 business, shall be decided without debate.
7 ‘‘(D) All appeals from the decisions of the Chair re-
8 lating to the application of the Rules of the House of Rep-
9 resentatives to the procedure relating to a resolution shall
10 be decided without debate.
11 ‘‘(f) If, before the passage by one House of a joint
12 resolution of that House described in subsection (a), that
13 House receives from the other House a joint resolution
14 described in subsection (a), then the following procedures
15 shall apply with respect to a joint resolution described in
16 subsection (a) of the House receiving the joint resolu-
17 tion—
18 ‘‘(1) the procedure in that House shall be the
19 same as if no joint resolution had been received from
20 the other House; but
21 ‘‘(2) the vote on final passage shall be on the
22 joint resolution of the other House.
23 ‘‘(g) The enactment of a resolution of approval does
24 not serve as a grant or modification of statutory authority
25 by Congress for the promulgation of a rule, does not extinVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS14
•HR 10 IH
1 guish or affect any claim, whether substantive or proce-
2 dural, against any alleged defect in a rule, and shall not
3 form part of the record before the court in any judicial
4 proceeding concerning a rule.
5 ‘‘(h) This section and section 803 are enacted by
6 Congress—
7 ‘‘(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of
8 the Senate and House of Representatives, respec-
9 tively, and as such it is deemed a part of the rules
10 of each House, respectively, but applicable only with
11 respect to the procedure to be followed in that
12 House in the case of a joint resolution described in
13 subsection (a), and it supersedes other rules only to
14 the extent that it is inconsistent with such rules; and
15 ‘‘(2) with full recognition of the constitutional
16 right of either House to change the rules (so far as
17 relating to the procedure of that House) at any time,
18 in the same manner, and to the same extent as in
19 the case of any other rule of that House.
20 ‘‘§ 803. Congressional disapproval procedure for
21 nonmajor rules
22 ‘‘(a) For purposes of this section, the term ‘joint res-
23 olution’ means only a joint resolution introduced in the
24 period beginning on the date on which the report referred
25 to in section 801(a)(1)(A) is received by Congress and
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS15
•HR 10 IH
1 ending 60 days thereafter (excluding days either House
2 of Congress is adjourned for more than 3 days during a
3 session of Congress), the matter after the resolving clause
4 of which is as follows: ‘That Congress disapproves the
5 nonmajor rule submitted by the l l  relating to l l,
6 and such rule shall have no force or effect.’ (The blank
7 spaces being appropriately filled in).
8 ‘‘(b)(1) A joint resolution described in subsection (a)
9 shall be referred to the committees in each House of Con-
10 gress with jurisdiction.
11 ‘‘(2) For purposes of this section, the term submis-
12 sion or publication date means the later of the date on
13 which—
14 ‘‘(A) the Congress receives the report submitted
15 under section 801(a)(1); or
16 ‘‘(B) the nonmajor rule is published in the Fed-
17 eral Register, if so published.
18 ‘‘(c) In the Senate, if the committee to which is re-
19 ferred a joint resolution described in subsection (a) has
20 not reported such joint resolution (or an identical joint
21 resolution) at the end of 15 session days after the date
22 of introduction of the joint resolution, such committee may
23 be discharged from further consideration of such joint res-
24 olution upon a petition supported in writing by 30 MemVerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS16
•HR 10 IH
1 bers of the Senate, and such joint resolution shall be
2 placed on the calendar.
3 ‘‘(d)(1) In the Senate, when the committee to which
4 a joint resolution is referred has reported, or when a com-
5 mittee is discharged (under subsection (c)) from further
6 consideration of a joint resolution described in subsection
7 (a), it is at any time thereafter in order (even though a
8 previous motion to the same effect has been disagreed to)
9 for a motion to proceed to the consideration of the joint
10 resolution, and all points of order against the joint resolu-
11 tion (and against consideration of the joint resolution) are
12 waived. The motion is not subject to amendment, or to
13 a motion to postpone, or to a motion to proceed to the
14 consideration of other business. A motion to reconsider the
15 vote by which the motion is agreed to or disagreed to shall
16 not be in order. If a motion to proceed to the consideration
17 of the joint resolution is agreed to, the joint resolution
18 shall remain the unfinished business of the Senate until
19 disposed of.
20 ‘‘(2) In the Senate, debate on the joint resolution,
21 and on all debatable motions and appeals in connection
22 therewith, shall be limited to not more than 10 hours,
23 which shall be divided equally between those favoring and
24 those opposing the joint resolution. A motion to further
25 limit debate is in order and not debatable. An amendment
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS17
•HR 10 IH
1 to, or a motion to postpone, or a motion to proceed to
2 the consideration of other business, or a motion to recom-
3 mit the joint resolution is not in order.
4 ‘‘(3) In the Senate, immediately following the conclu-
5 sion of the debate on a joint resolution described in sub-
6 section (a), and a single quorum call at the conclusion of
7 the debate if requested in accordance with the rules of the
8 Senate, the vote on final passage of the joint resolution
9 shall occur.
10 ‘‘(4) Appeals from the decisions of the Chair relating
11 to the application of the rules of the Senate to the proce-
12 dure relating to a joint resolution described in subsection
13 (a) shall be decided without debate.
14 ‘‘(e) In the Senate the procedure specified in sub-
15 section (c) or (d) shall not apply to the consideration of
16 a joint resolution respecting a nonmajor rule—
17 ‘‘(1) after the expiration of the 60 session days
18 beginning with the applicable submission or publica-
19 tion date, or
20 ‘‘(2) if the report under section 801(a)(1)(A)
21 was submitted during the period referred to in sec-
22 tion 801(d)(1), after the expiration of the 60 session
23 days beginning on the 15th session day after the
24 succeeding session of Congress first convenes.
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS18
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(f) If, before the passage by one House of a joint
2 resolution of that House described in subsection (a), that
3 House receives from the other House a joint resolution
4 described in subsection (a), then the following procedures
5 shall apply:
6 ‘‘(1) The joint resolution of the other House
7 shall not be referred to a committee.
8 ‘‘(2) With respect to a joint resolution described
9 in subsection (a) of the House receiving the joint
10 resolution—
11 ‘‘(A) the procedure in that House shall be
12 the same as if no joint resolution had been re-
13 ceived from the other House; but
14 ‘‘(B) the vote on final passage shall be on
15 the joint resolution of the other House.
16 ‘‘§ 804. Definitions
17 ‘‘For purposes of this chapter—
18 ‘‘(1) The term ‘Federal agency’ means any
19 agency as that term is defined in section 551(1).
20 ‘‘(2) The term ‘major rule’ means any rule, in-
21 cluding an interim final rule, that the Administrator
22 of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
23 of the Office of Management and Budget finds has
24 resulted in or is likely to result in—
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS19
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(A) an annual effect on the economy of
2 $100,000,000 or more;
3 ‘‘(B) a major increase in costs or prices for
4 consumers, individual industries, Federal,
5 State, or local government agencies, or geo-
6 graphic regions; or
7 ‘‘(C) significant adverse effects on competi-
8 tion, employment, investment, productivity, in-
9 novation, or on the ability of United States-
10 based enterprises to compete with foreign-based
11 enterprises in domestic and export markets.
12 ‘‘(3) The term ‘nonmajor rule’ means any rule
13 that is not a major rule.
14 ‘‘(4) The term ‘rule’ has the meaning given
15 such term in section 551, except that such term does
16 not include—
17 ‘‘(A) any rule of particular applicability,
18 including a rule that approves or prescribes for
19 the future rates, wages, prices, services, or al-
20 lowances therefore, corporate or financial struc-
21 tures, reorganizations, mergers, or acquisitions
22 thereof, or accounting practices or disclosures
23 bearing on any of the foregoing;
24 ‘‘(B) any rule relating to agency manage-
25 ment or personnel; or
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS20
•HR 10 IH
1 ‘‘(C) any rule of agency organization, pro-
2 cedure, or practice that does not substantially
3 affect the rights or obligations of non-agency
4 parties.
5 ‘‘§ 805. Judicial review
6 ‘‘(a) No determination, finding, action, or omission
7 under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.
8 ‘‘(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), a court may de-
9 termine whether a Federal agency has completed the nec-
10 essary requirements under this chapter for a rule to take
11 effect.
12 ‘‘§ 806. Exemption for monetary policy
13 ‘‘Nothing in this chapter shall apply to rules that con-
14 cern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the
15 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the
16 Federal Open Market Committee.
17 ‘‘§ 807. Effective date of certain rules
18 ‘‘Notwithstanding section 801—
19 ‘‘(1) any rule that establishes, modifies, opens,
20 closes, or conducts a regulatory program for a com-
21 mercial, recreational, or subsistence activity related
22 to hunting, fishing, or camping; or
23 ‘‘(2) any rule other than a major rule which an
24 agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the
25 finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in
VerDate Mar 15 2010 23:54 Jan 20, 2011 Jkt 099200 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H10.IH H10
smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with BILLS21
•HR 10 IH
1 the rule issued) that notice and public procedure
2 thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
3 to the public interest,
4 shall take effect at such time as the Federal agency pro-
5 mulgating the rule determines.’’.

The above is available at http://geoffdavis.house.gov/UploadedFiles/REINS.pdf.

About the REINS Act
 
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” – U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 1

Excessive delegation of Congress’ constitutional responsibility for making the law of the land to the Executive Branch has created a lack of accountability in Congress for many of the most burdensome federal regulations. 

Although this trend is not new, allowing major decisions to be made by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats is not consistent with the constitutional responsibilities of our representative government. 

To restore Congressional accountability for the regulatory process, Congressman Geoff Davis [KY-04] introduced the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act.  The REINS Act would require Congress to take an up-or-down, stand-alone vote, and for the President to sign-off on all new major rules before they can be enforced on the American people, job-creating small businesses, or State and local governments.

Major rules are those that have an annual economic impact of $100 million or more.  Last year, 100 major rules were finalized by the Executive Branch.

A recent study commissioned by the Small Business Administration found that annual regulatory compliance costs in the United States hit $1.75 trillion in 2008.  A staggering figure that exceeds the total collected from income taxes that year ($1.449 trillion).

Not all regulations are bad; many provide important public safeguards.  However, when a proposed regulation could have an impact in the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars on our economy, it should be subject to the review by the elected representatives of the people.

The REINS Act is about improving the regulatory process.  If the REINS Act becomes law, Members of Congress will be accountable to their constituents on the question of whether a new regulation is truly needed, or is an unnecessary burden.  This will encourage Congress and agencies to work together to develop and pass regulations that implement the original intent of laws.

Furthermore, the REINS Act would prevent Administrations from either party from bypassing Congress to implement a political agenda through regulation.

The REINS Act is a commonsense reform that will increase congressional accountability, improve the regulatory process, and protect the American people from further unnecessary regulatory burdens on our economy.     

I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican, I'm a Socialist and a Marxist, I don't support the United States government, this is one of the reasons why.

Opinions?

[Darthkatzs]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

[The Doctor, RIP Juggernaut]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

This.
When ever you post a some thing like this I do some thing you don't seem to...

Research it. And I often find out that they reword it to make it sound horrible but really they're way off.

[tics]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

Darth, I have read the bill, and I quoted the Huffington Post because their report on it is one I agree with. Perhaps you shouldn't be such an ass as you usually are. Oh, and some people do care, and if you don't care don't bother posting.

This.
When ever you post a some thing like this I do some thing you don't seem to...

Research it. And I often find out that they reword it to make it sound horrible but really they're way off.

I've done research on it, and quite honestly it's one of those rare to-the-point bills that explicitly explains that the bill is intended to give Congress the ability to veto White House regulations. What I find funny about this is that the only regulations that need fixing are those of Congress, especially with un-needed agencies that were created by Congress including the DEA and the Department of Homeland Security.

[RyanPeters]

They really want the US to fail dont they...

[Darthkatzs]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

Darth, I have read the bill, and I quoted the Huffington Post because their report on it is one I agree with. Perhaps you shouldn't be such an ass as you usually are. Oh, and some people do care, and if you don't care don't bother posting.

I'm only an ass to people who can't get their act straight.
Who are those people? People like you who think they sound smart by complaining about such things as laws and bills but never seem to come out with any (other) solution.
I know dozens of people like you around here. They complain, try to sound smart. Call you stupid when you make an actual decent argument against them then go on to smoke their daily portion of weed.
This is an international gaming community forums, not a political debate. If you really feel the urge to get your opinion out on this, visit your local congressman or senator.

[tics]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

Darth, I have read the bill, and I quoted the Huffington Post because their report on it is one I agree with. Perhaps you shouldn't be such an ass as you usually are. Oh, and some people do care, and if you don't care don't bother posting.

I'm only an ass to people who can't get their act straight.
Who are those people? People like you who think they sound smart by complaining about such things as laws and bills but never seem to come out with any (other) solution.
I know dozens of people like you around here. They complain, try to sound smart. Call you stupid when you make an actual decent argument against them then go on to smoke their daily portion of weed.
This is an international gaming community forums, not a political debate. If you really feel the urge to get your opinion out on this, visit your local congressman or senator.

Blah blah blah.....political discussion is allowed, and if the only thing you're going to do is be an ass and not actually contribute to the thread I'd appreciate if you'd just go on your way.

I posted this to get opinions from people who actually care a little bit out politics - and there are people here who do. Contribute to the thread, and stop going off-topic Darth.

Also, making a judgement of me on one post when you hardly know me is really judging a book by a cover, although I honestly hate that saying.

And you ask for an alternate solution? The alternate solution is simply not passing the bill. The only thing the bill truly does - after reading it over, reading various articles and appeals from Senators and Representatives and forming an educated opinion - is guarantee that if the outcome of the 2012 presidential election leads to another Democrat as president, the Republicans will be able to guarantee a deadlock in order to prevent ideology of the Democrat Party from influencing legislation.

[Darthkatzs]

Pretty sure nobody around here cares.
If you're trying to make yourself look smart, nobody cares either.
How about you read the actual bill instead of the biased articles written about the bill then judge it in an objective way.
I sure didn't read the bill and I don't care, but the US press is extremely biased and if you are going to follow one article on the bill it will create a different opinion on your side as they tend to kneed it in a way that fits them.

Darth, I have read the bill, and I quoted the Huffington Post because their report on it is one I agree with. Perhaps you shouldn't be such an ass as you usually are. Oh, and some people do care, and if you don't care don't bother posting.

I'm only an ass to people who can't get their act straight.
Who are those people? People like you who think they sound smart by complaining about such things as laws and bills but never seem to come out with any (other) solution.
I know dozens of people like you around here. They complain, try to sound smart. Call you stupid when you make an actual decent argument against them then go on to smoke their daily portion of weed.
This is an international gaming community forums, not a political debate. If you really feel the urge to get your opinion out on this, visit your local congressman or senator.

Blah blah blah.....political discussion is allowed, and if the only thing you're going to do is be an ass and not actually contribute to the thread I'd appreciate if you'd just go on your way.

I posted this to get opinions from people who actually care a little bit out politics - and there are people here who do. Contribute to the thread, and stop going off-topic Darth.

Also, making a judgement of me on one post when you hardly know me is really judging a book by a cover, although I honestly hate that saying.

And you ask for an alternate solution? The alternate solution is simply not passing the bill. The only thing the bill truly does - after reading it over, reading various articles and appeals from Senators and Representatives and forming an educated opinion - is guarantee that if the outcome of the 2012 presidential election leads to another Democrat as president, the Republicans will be able to guarantee a deadlock in order to prevent ideology of the Democrat Party from influencing legislation.

I care more about politics than you think, enough to actually study it (well not directly, but I believe law is a good start), just not US politics because everything is too fucked up already to even start talking about it.
I've known your smug attitude for a while, so don't say I judge you by just that post.
Yes, look at all the people who "contributed" to the thread...
Talking about politics won't get you anywhere, doing politics will. Take that sentence and burn it in your head. It might come in handy one day when you decide to take your life to a step where you can honestly say that you are actually doing something.
Right now you're just being a snob hippie who sits on his ass all day and complains. Then when people tell you to stand up and do something about it you say that it's impossible because it's all corrupt.

[FPSRussia]

My general idea of this is that we are getting ourselves into a worse situation then we are in now, they even have something out there that re-enables military to step in at anytime and even execute us citizens on site... The US Senate's Defense Authorization Bill redefines America as a "battlefield" and authorizes US troops to conduct military arrests of civilians on US soil, and to indefinitely detain citizens without charge or trial.

[tics]

My general idea of this is that we are getting ourselves into a worse situation then we are in now, they even have something out there that re-enables military to step in at anytime and even execute us citizens on site... The US Senate's Defense Authorization Bill redefines America as a "battlefield" and authorizes US troops to conduct military arrests of civilians on US soil, and to indefinitely detain citizens without charge or trial.

National Defense Authorization Act for the year 2012 is what you're thinking of. H.R. 1540 is under revision by the House of Representatives. A section of H.R. 1540 allows for indefinite detention of United States citizens without trial, and also allows for detention at Guantanamo Bay. The bill is entirely unconstitutional, as the constitution guarantees citizens of these United States with the right to fair trial. H.R. 1540 and the coinciding Senate bill S 1867 allows for military detainment without trial. It's predicted that the bill will - if passed by both the legislative and executive branches - set a precedent for Congressional bills that violate civil liberties established in the Constitution.

As for REINS. The powers of the Congress, and the executive branch - the White House - are established in the Constitution. Since the bill contradicts the Fourteenth or Fifteenth (?...not sure) Amendment it's therefore unconstitutional. I've found when conversing with some people that there's a general assumption that unconstitutional automatically means that it tramples rights. Some people seem to forget there's more than the Bill of Rights in the Constitution :/

[Penguin]

I think that there are a lot of bills that are unconstitutional, the government will do what it wants in the end. That is just my opinion I could care less what happens now, because it is all going down the shitter.