PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 1, 2012
Regulatory Accountability and Economic Freedom Act of 2012 - Revises criteria for the federal agency rule making process. Requires federal agencies proposing a rule to make all preliminary and final factual determinations based on evidence and to consider: (1) the legal authority under which a rule may be proposed, (2) the specific nature and significance of the problem the agency may address with a rule, (3) any reasonable alternatives for a new rule, and (4) the potential costs and benefits associated with potential alternative rules.
Requires agencies to publish in the Federal Register advance notice of proposed rule making for major rules, high-impact rules, and rules involving novel legal or policy issues. Defines "major rule" as any rule that is likely to impose: (1) an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, adjusted annually for inflation; (2) a major increase in costs or prices; (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or U.S. competitiveness; or (4) significant impacts on multiple sectors of the economy. Defines "high-impact rule" as any rule that is likely to impose an annual cost on the economy of $1 billion or more, adjusted annually for inflation.
Rewrites provisions for congressional review of agency rule making to require congressional approval of major rules before they may take effect (currently, major rules take effect unless Congress passes and the President signs a joint resolution disapproving them).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Sets forth House and Senate procedures for enacting joint resolutions approving major rules and disapproving non-major rules.
Establishes the United States Red Tape Reduction Commission to advise federal agencies on the modification, consolidation, or elimination of federal regulatory requirements to reduce direct or indirect burdens on U.S. businesses.
People & committees
Rep. Latham, Tom [R-IA-4] · R–IA
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 Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Rules, the Budget, and Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Committees on Rules, the Budget, and Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Committees on Rules, the Budget, and Oversight and Government Reform, 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 Committees on Rules, the Budget, and Oversight and Government Reform, 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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.4116 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.4116 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.4116 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.4116 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.