Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agency Rule Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tables SB423 after heated exchange on legislature’s authority over agency rulemaking
Summary
SB423 would have required legislative approval for major agency rules, required cost-benefit evaluation and would have repealed unenshrined rules after five years; committee members debated constitutionality, scope and potential overreach and a motion to table passed.
Senator Scott presented SB423, a proposal to require legislative approval of agency rules designated as “major” — rules with large projected fiscal impacts or other significant effects — to allow emergency implementation by the governor between sessions and to sunset rules not codified into statute after five years.
The bill’s sponsor said the measure restores accountability and gives the legislature a formal role in approving rules that have major economic or policy impacts, citing recent rules adopted by the Environment Department regarding vehicle standards. Supporters said many states use variations of legislative review of rules and noted that some form of review exists in 41 states in varying approaches; some committee members disputed that figure and the legal analysis in the fiscal-impact report.
Opponents argued the proposal raises separation-of-powers concerns and could be unconstitutional under New Mexico’s constitution because it would place legislative control over an executive-branch rulemaking process that agencies historically carry out with technical expertise. Senators also said the proposal’s threshold (an annual effect of $10.1 million or more) and other criteria could sweep in large swaths of education and other regulatory activity and that the bill focused on costs without incorporating benefit analysis.
After extended debate and a roll-call motion to table brought by Senator Harmia, the motion to table carried. Several senators urged greater attention to institutional balance and to existing public-rulemaking opportunities; the committee recorded a vote to table and the bill did not advance in Rules.
