PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 18, 1996
Regulatory Accountability Act of 1996 - Amends the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 with regard to Federal mandates to make it out of order in the House of Representatives or the Senate to consider any new or reauthorized measure (controlled private regulatory legislation) imposing costs on the private sector of $100 million or more (controlled Federal private sector mandate) unless it specifies a regulatory cost authorization for each such mandate of the dollar amount of private sector costs authorized to result from implementing or enforcing regulations. Requires the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the costs of mandate compliance for each measure reported by an authorization committee. Prohibits the total amount of private sector compliance costs from exceeding the regulatory cost authorization for a covered law. Prohibits a proposed covered regulation from taking effect unless the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has certified in the Federal Register that its implementation will not violate the first prohibition. Exempts from such prohibitions any regulation which the President finds is necessary because of an emergency. Requires such estimates to be publicly available for each covered law.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Economic Growth, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs.
Referred to the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, 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 Government Reform and Oversight, 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 Government Reform and Oversight, 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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 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.3277 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.3277 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.3277 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.3277 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.