Unfunded Mandates Accountability and Transparency Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 2, 2021
Unfunded Mandates Accountability and Transparency Act
This bill revises rulemaking requirements with respect to unfunded mandates.
Specifically, the bill requires federal agencies to prepare and publish in the Federal Register an initial and final regulatory impact analysis prior to promulgating any proposed or final major rule. The analysis must include regulatory alternatives to the rule.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Major rule means a rule that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs determines is likely to cause
an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more;
a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, federal, state, local, or tribal government agencies, or geographic regions; or
significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, public health and safety, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.
Before promulgating any proposed or final major rule, an agency shall select the regulatory alternative that maximizes net benefits, taking into consideration only the costs and benefits that arise within the scope of the statutory provision that authorizes the rulemaking, with exceptions.
The bill prohibits Congress from considering a bill that increases private sector costs more than a certain amount unless certain conditions are met.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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 S.170 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 S.170 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 S.170 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 S.170 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.