Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Rule Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Idaho lawmakers introduce package to tighten and sunset administrative rules
Summary
Representative Vito Barbieri, R‑District 3, asked the House State Affairs Committee to introduce a trio of bills to add expirations for administrative rules, curb agency rulemaking timelines and create a clearer process for the legislature to reject rules already in effect.
Representative Vito Barbieri, R‑District 3, asked the House State Affairs Committee to introduce three related rulemaking proposals—RS 32‑100, RS 32‑098 and RS 32‑099—aimed at imposing time limits and more legislative control over administrative rules.
Barbieri told the committee RS 32‑100 would restore a sunset or expiration mechanism for administrative rules, arguing a perpetual rulemaking regime conflicts with legislative oversight. "The idea that administrative rules would go on in perpetuity is just not consistent with our ability to have control over those rules," he said, noting additional technical provisions would be fleshed out at a hearing.
The package includes RS 32‑098, which Barbieri described as a measure to limit the executive branch's authority to promulgate rules over a multi‑year transition. "After that period when an amendment or a new statute is performed they only have 2 years to bring those," Barbieri said, describing it as a check on agency directors' rulemaking authority.
RS 32‑099 would create a clearer legislative pathway to challenge rules already in effect. Barbieri said that when a committee chairman pulls a final rule into review and the joint committee rejects it, the process for treating that rule has been unclear; the RS would make a joint concurrent resolution the mechanism to reject a final rule and preserve the legislature's oversight options.
A friendly drafting change was adopted on the introducer's motion to move two statutory dates from July 1 to June 30 (page 1, line 34; page 2, line 12) so the statutory year aligns with the committee's intent. The committee voted to introduce the RS package with that change; there was no recorded opposition on the floor during the committee's voice votes.
Barbieri said he looks forward to full hearings on the measures where more technical aspects and implementation details can be debated.
What happened next: The committee voted to introduce RS 32‑100, RS 32‑098 and RS 32‑099 (as amended) to the docket for further consideration.
Why it matters: If enacted as proposed, the measures would alter the balance of authority between the legislature and executive agencies by adding expirations, limiting timelines for agencies to adopt rules, and clarifying the legislative method for rejecting existing rules. Supporters framed the package as restoring legislative oversight; proponents said hearings will address details. Opponents or alternative views were not recorded in committee during the introductions and are expected to surface at subsequent hearings.
Procedural note: Introduction is the first step that puts the proposals on the committee's agenda for a formal hearing and further amendment; no final legislative action occurred during this meeting.
