PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 9, 2022
Regulatory Accountability Act
This bill expands and provides statutory authority for notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures to require federal agencies to consider (1) whether a rulemaking is required by statute or is within the discretion of the agency, (2) whether existing laws or rules could be amended or rescinded to address the problem, and (3) reasonable alternatives to a new rule.
For proposed major or high-impact rules that have a specified significant economic impact or adverse effect on the public health or safety, an agency must
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
publish notice of such rulemaking to invite interested parties to propose alternatives and ideas to accomplish the agency's objectives;
allow persons interested in high-impact or certain major rules to petition for a public hearing with oral presentation, cross-examination, and the burden of proof on the proponent of the rule;
adopt the rule that maximizes net benefits within the scope of the statutory provision authorizing the rule, unless the agency explains the costs and benefits that justify adopting an alternative rule and such rule is approved by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA); and
publish a framework and metrics for measuring the ongoing effectiveness of the rule.
Agencies must notify OIRA with certain information about a proposed rulemaking, including specified discussion and preliminary explanations concerning a major or high-impact rule. Further, OIRA must establish certain rulemaking guidelines.
Additionally, the bill (1) revises the scope of judicial review of agency actions, and (2) establishes requirements for agencies issuing guidance.
People & committees
Rep. Van Duyne, Beth [R-TX-24] · 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 Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 10, 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.8796 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.8796 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.8796 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.8796 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.