PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 7, 2011
Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2011 - (Sec. 2) States that the purpose of this Act is to increase accountability for and transparency in the federal regulatory process by requiring Congress to approve all new major regulations.
(Sec. 3) Revises provisions relating to congressional review of agency rulemaking to require a federal agency promulgating a rule to include in its report to Congress and to the Comptroller General (GAO) a classification of the rule as a major or nonmajor rule and an analysis of any jobs added or lost, differentiating between public and private sector jobs, in its cost-benefit analysis of such rule.
Requires a joint resolution of approval of major rules to be enacted before such rules may take effect (currently, major rules take effect unless a joint resolution disapproving them is enacted). Provides that if a joint resolution of approval is not enacted by the end of 70 session days or legislative days, as applicable, after the agency proposing the rule submits its report on such rule to Congress, the major rule shall be deemed not to be approved and shall not take effect. Permits a major rule to take effect for one 90-calendar day period without such approval if the President determines it is necessary because of an imminent threat to health or safety or other emergency, for the enforcement of criminal laws, for national security, or to implement an international trade agreement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth the congressional approval procedure for major rules and the congressional disapproval procedure for nonmajor rules.
Requires the introduction of a joint resolution addressing a report classifying a rule as a major rule within three legislative days in the House of Representative and three session days in the Senate. Prohibits any amendments to such a joint resolution at any stage of the legislative process. Provides for expedited consideration of a joint resolution of approval and requires a vote on such resolution in the Senate within 15 session days after it is reported by the committee to which it was referred, or after such committee has been discharged from further consideration of the resolution.
Allows a court to review whether an agency has completed the necessary requirements under this Act for a rule to take effect (currently, no judicial review of a determination, finding, action, or omission in the rulemaking process is subject to judicial review). Limits the effect of a joint resolution of approval of a major rule.
Prohibits an agency from allowing a major rule to take effect without the congressional review procedures set forth in this Act.
(Sec. 4) Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to provide that any congressional approval procedure set forth in this Act affecting budget authority, outlays, or receipts shall be assumed to be effective unless it is not approved in accordance with this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Davis, Geoff [R-KY-4] · R–KY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by recorded vote: 241 - 184 (Roll no. 901).
House roll call 901 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 241 - 184 (Roll no. 901).
House roll call 901 · Individual votesOn motion to recommit with instructions Failed by recorded vote: 183 - 235 (Roll no. 900).
House roll call 900 · Individual votesThe previous question on the motion to recommit with instructions was ordered without objection. (consideration: CR H8236)
Floor summary: DEBATE - The House proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the DeLauro motion to recommit. The instructions contained in the motion seek to require the bill to be reported back to the House with an amendment to insert a provision entitled "Protection of Food Safety and Consumer's Right to Know through Country-of-Origin Labeling".
Ms. DeLauro moved to recommit with instructions to Judiciary. (consideration: CR H8235-8237; text: CR H8235)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule. (consideration: CR H8235)
The House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H8222-8224)
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 10.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - The Chair announced that the unfinished business was on the question of adoption of amendments which were debated earlier and on which further proceedings were postponed.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Moore amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Moore demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Moore Part B amendment No. 7.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote, announced the noes had prevailed. Ms. Jackson Lee (TX) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of adoption of the amendment until a time to be announced.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Jackson Lee (TX) Part B amendment No. 6.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the McCarthy (NY) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mrs. McCarthy (NY) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McCarthy (NY) Part B amendment No. 5.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the McKinley Part B amendment No. 4.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Schrader amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Schrader demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Schrader Part B amendment No. 3.
POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on the Johnson (GA) amendment, the Chair put the question on adoption of the amendment and by voice vote announced that the noes had prevailed. Mr. Johnson (GA) demanded a recorded vote and the Chair postponed further proceedings on adoption of the amendment until later in the legislative day.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Johnson (GA) Part B amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 479, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Sessions Part B amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 10.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Jeff Denham to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 479 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 10 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The resolution waives all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 479. (consideration: CR H8209-8237)
Rule H. Res. 479 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 479 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 10 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Specified amendments are in order. The resolution waives all points of order against consideration of the bill. The resolution waives all points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 192.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-278, Part II.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Rules. H. Rept. 112-278, Part II.
House Committee on Rules Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Nov. 22, 2011.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-278, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-278, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 22 - 14.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.