Last week there were two interesting bills introduced that
dealt with the controversial issue of ‘midnight rules’; regulatory action taken
during the lame duck portion of a President’s term of office between his losing
election day and the inauguration of his successor. Rep. Ribble (R,WI)
introduced HR
4607, the Midnight Rule Relief Act of 2012. A day later Sen. Johnson (R,WI)
introduced the companion bill, S
2368, in the Senate.
Midnight Rules
There is a natural inclination in the closing days of an
Administration to finish up uncompleted projects, particularly when the
successor Administration is from another Party. Just as naturally the successor
gets a tad bit bent out of shape when those actions put rules and regulations
into place that are ideologically objectionable to the new comers; they are put
into the unenviable position of having to enforce such rules until they are
able to go through the lengthy process of changing or removing them. Add to
that equation the time lag due to the nomination vetting and approval process
and the last minute regulations can remain in place for quite some time.
Both Presidents Clinton and Bush put out official word in
the last summer of their respective presidencies that the Executive Branch
agencies were not to start any new regulatory actions since they knew their
terms were expiring. Still, both were accused by their successors of having
‘unfairly’ initiated midnight rules.
President Obama cannot be expected to take the same step
this summer since his Administration intends to win re-election this fall and
would expect to continue to make new rules and regulations for another four
years. At this point it is way too early and the polling too close to clearly
state that they are mistaken in that belief.
The Legislation
Both bills have identical language (that’s why they are
called companion bills after all) that would prohibit any executive branch
agency from proposing or finalizing any midnight rule that would fall into one
of the following three categories, as determined by the Administrator of the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) {§2}:
• Would result in an annual effect
on the economy of $100,000,000 or more;
• Would result in a major increase
in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or geographic regions; or
• Would result in significant
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or on the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.
There are qualifications and exceptions to the prohibition.
Rules that have a previously set deadline, set by law or judicial decree, would
be allowed. The President could exempt rules if they pertain to certain defined
categories like national security or imminent threat to health or safety. And,
of course since this a Republican authored bill, any regulatory action that
reduces or eliminates rules or regulations could still go forward during the
lame duck period.
Midnight Rules and Chemical Security
If this bill did become law (more about that later) and
President Obama did lose the upcoming election, it could have some interesting
effects on potential chemical security regulations. There are three currently
pending chemical security rules that could potentially have final rules
published during the resulting lame duck portion of the President’s term; personnel
surety, ammonium nitrate security, and TWIC reader.
The CFATS personnel surety rules that would become an
addendum to 6 CFR Part 27 do not have a mandated deadline, so they would not be
permitted during lame duck period under this bill. The other two rule makings
have deadlines that were set into law; the first by a DHS spending bill and the
other by an amendment to the Homeland Security Act of 2002. The fact that both
deadlines are long since passed would not appear to have any bearing on their
being exempted by the language in this bill.
Possible EPA Chemical Security Rule
There has been a significant amount of talk lately by a wide
variety of environmental activists (including the Bush
EPA Administrator) that the EPA should impose IST requirements on high risk
chemical facilities under the General Duty clause of the Clean Air Act. I haven’t
discussed this move to date because I do not expect that a rule could be
crafted before the election nor complete the ‘publish and comment’ process any
time soon. And it seems to me that the current Administration has little focus
on chemical security issues, particularly this late in their first term.
Having said that, I can posit a scenario where the EPA might
try to short circuit the rule making process by initiating an ‘interim final
rule’ that would greatly reduce the time involved in the rule making process.
That scenario would involve an ‘imminent threat to health and safety’ that
would still exempt the rulemaking process from restrictions under this bill.
Chance of Passage
I have no doubt that this bill could easily pass in the
House this month. The speed with which it was introduced and ordered reported
by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is an example of how
quickly this bill could move. Given that it is obviously directed at President
Obama, I would expect that a House floor vote would fall on a pretty strict
party line split.
If this actually came to a vote in the Senate (a near impossibility
in itself) it would fail along a party line vote for the same reason.
Finally, if the bill did manage to pass in both Houses,
there is no way that President Obama would potentially tie his own hands if he
were to fail in his re-election bid. This bill would be vetoed so fast the GPO
ink would hardly be dry on the document.
But…. We might just see a minor coup for the Democrats with
this bill. If the House passes the bill this month, it would be smart for Sen.
Reid to just sit on the bill until November 7th (the day after the
election). If Obama were to loose, he could just hold the bill to the last day
of the lame duck session and pass it then without amendments (okay it wouldn’t
be easy, but it could be done). Then it would only effect the last month or so
of the Obama term, but would be on the books for the next Republican President.
And he would certainly have enough votes to stop a repeal bill from coming to
the Senate floor in the 113th Congress and likely the 114th
Congress.
It will be interesting to watch this bill. And I will.
No comments:
Post a Comment