Truth in Regulating Act of 2000 - Provides that when a Federal agency publishes an economically significant rule, a chairman or ranking member of a committee of jurisdiction of either House of Congress may request the Comptroller General to review such rule. Defines "economically significant rule" to mean any proposed or final rule, including an interim or direct final rule, that may have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities, or for which an agency has prepared an initial or final regulatory flexibility analysis.Requires the Comptroller General to submit a report on each rule reviewed, including an independent evaluation of: (1) the costs and benefits; (2) alternative approaches that could achieve the same goal more cost-effectively or that could provide greater net benefits, and if applicable, a brief explanation of any statutory reasons why such alternatives could not be adopted; (3) the regulatory impact analysis, federalism assessment, or other analysis or assessment prepared by the agency or required for the rule; and (4) the results of the evaluation and the implication of those results, including an evaluation of any changes from the proposed rule made by the agency in the final rule. Requires the Comptroller General to develop procedures for determining the priority and number of requests for review which give the highest priority to requests regarding a notice of proposed rulemaking and to requests regarding an interim final rulemaking.Authorizes appropriations for FY 2001 through 2003.Provides that this Act shall not apply to rules published after three years after its effective date.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.4744 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.4744 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.4744 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.4744 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.