Missouri bill would expand JCAR oversight to agency guidance, add subpoena power
Loading...
Summary
Rep. Matthew Overcast’s HB 1641 would let the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules review agency guidance that functions like rules, require 10‑day notice to JCAR, allow subpoenas and notices of noncompliance for actions with economic effects over $250,000, and link findings to appropriations review. Supporters called it a fix for ‘shadow rulemaking’; some members raised separation‑of‑powers questions.
Representative Matthew Overcast introduced House Bill 1641, saying it would close a “shadow rulemaking” loophole by letting the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules review guidance documents, policy directives and manuals when those documents operate like formal rules. Overcast told the Committee on Government Efficiency the bill would require agencies to notify JCAR within 10 days of issuing guidance, permit JCAR to determine whether an agency action constitutes a rule under Missouri law, and give the committee subpoena authority to compel documents and testimony.
Overcast said the proposal would not alter the legislature’s delegation of authority but would provide ‘‘meaningful oversight’’ by giving JCAR tools to identify agency actions that lack statutory authority, impose an unapproved economic impact or exceed legislative intent. He described a 30‑day cure period for agencies that receive notices of noncompliance and said the bill would allow standing committees to consider oversight findings during the appropriations process so noncompliance could carry fiscal consequences.
Supporters said the bill responds to instances in which agencies use internal memoranda or guidance to set obligations that should go through the Chapter 536 rulemaking process. Lisa Bennett, a witness in favor, cited Article I, Section 31 of the Missouri Constitution and recounted litigation tied to COVID‑era county health orders as an example of agency overreach.
Several members asked whether the bill raises separation‑of‑powers concerns and pressed how JCAR could enforce compliance. Representative Murphy cited an example where agency guidance, he said, had altered how a statute’s funding was implemented and asked whether JCAR could constitutionally compel agencies to change conduct. Overcast acknowledged the constitutional limits on direct executive control, saying the bill relies on existing mechanisms — nullification by concurrent resolution (rarely used) and budgetary leverage — and seeks to make oversight findings more visible to appropriators, not to create direct executive‑branch management by the legislature.
No formal action or vote was taken. The committee concluded the public hearing after receiving testimony and questions and will consider the bill in further meetings.
