Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Regulatory Freedom Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances Regulatory Freedom Act after debate over fiscal oversight
Summary
The House Government Operations Committee advanced HB 1913, the Regulatory Freedom Act, which would require agencies to publish rules during a 45‑day notice period, solicit regulated‑industry cost input, and trigger standalone legislative consideration for rules with an estimated negative fiscal impact over $1 million across five years. The measure passed out of committee 12–1.
The House Government Operations Committee voted 12–1 to advance House Bill 1913, the Regulatory Freedom Act, after the sponsor described new requirements for agencies to disclose rule text during a 45‑day public notice period and to seek input from trade groups on compliance costs.
Representative/Chairman Boyd, the bill sponsor, said the measure would "require agencies that are filing regulatory rules to publish the rule ... on the website during the 45 day public notice period" and would force agencies to develop fiscal‑impact statements when a rule has an anticipated negative financial effect. "If it is determined that it will have a negative impact of more than $1,000,000 over a 5 year period of time," Boyd said, "those rules will be voted on on a stand alone legislative measure, before the General Assembly and will not go into effect until the General Assembly has passed both chambers." The sponsor and counsel clarified that emergency rules remain exempt and that the change applies prospectively, not to rules already in effect.
Public witnesses supporting the bill included Jack Powers of Beacon Impact, who told the committee his group "supports this bill" because it provides more legislative oversight, and Michael Latvie of Americans for Prosperity, who said the measure helps "ensure that when especially burdensome rules ... have the force of law that we treat them with the same oversight as the laws themselves." Kevin Hensley of the Tennessee Farm Bureau urged oversight and broader stakeholder engagement for agricultural businesses.
Members questioned whether the bill creates instability for businesses if rules are held in abeyance pending a later legislative vote. Representative Clemens asked whether the measure permits agencies to "cease enforcing some sort of rule midstream," and Boyd responded that existing rules would not be disturbed and that the change applies to future rules that meet the fiscal threshold. The committee voted to report HB 1913 to Calendar & Rules.
What happens next: HB 1913 will be scheduled on the calendar for further consideration in the full House and, if acted on there, then proceeds to the Senate as required by the regular legislative process.
