The U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill Wednesday to allow lawsuits to delay major rulemaking even though the White House has threatened to veto the measure over its potential impact on environmental, financial and other regulations.
Backers of the bill claim it will give industries a chance to challenge major rules before they go into effect, and before companies have to potentially spend billions of dollars to comply with them. Before the 244-180 vote in favor, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., referred to the estimated $10 billion in costs from the Environmental Protection Agency’s power plant emission rules, which were overturned by the 2015 Supreme Court decision in Michigan v. EPA, saying the measure would allow for substantive review of unelected bureaucrats’ actions.
The bill’s main backer, Rep. Tom Marino, R-Pa., said the passage of the bill into law would help businesses and communities avoid the high cost of laws that ultimately fail in the courts.
Marino’s REVIEW Act of 2016 would require the Office of Management and Budget to designate all rules having more than $1 billion as “high impact,” a designation that would be published along with the final rule. Such rules would be subject to an additional 60-day delay before taking effect and stayed from taking effect during the course of any and all litigation challenging them.
Many Democrats objected that the bill would delay serious consideration of necessary rules mandated by statute. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., further said that the bill would allow for judicial gamesmanship, where industries could challenge the rule to delay any cost of compliance.
The White House issued a veto threat Tuesday, saying the bill would slow agency processes mandated by law, harm efforts to address public safety hazards and “promote unwarranted litigation, introduce harmful delay, and, in many cases, thwart implementation of statutory mandates and execution of duly enacted laws.”