PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 3, 2017
Regulatory Improvement and Transparency Act of 2017
Administrative Procedures Improvement Act of 2017
The bill revises the process that governs the way in which executive agencies may propose and issue regulations, including by establishing requirements that agencies must follow when proposing or issuing a major rule. A major rule is defined as one that is likely to cause an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, a major increase in costs or prices, or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, public health and safety, or the environment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) must provide guidance on, and oversight of, agencies' assessments of their proposed major rules.
Pilot Retrospective Review Commission Act of 2017
The bill establishes in the legislative branch a Pilot Regulatory Review Commission to evaluate and provide recommendations for modifying, consolidating, or repealing certain regulations that impact the transportation sector.
Plain Writing Act for Regulations Act of 2017
When issuing or revising regulations, executive agencies must use plain writing that is clear, concise, and well-organized if feasible.
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Transparency Act of 2017
OIRA must ensure greater openness, accessibility, and accountability in the regulatory review process.
Cost-Benefit Analysis Improvement Act of 2017
The General Services Administration must contract with the National Academy of Public Administration to publish a study on the costs and benefits associated with major rules.
People & committees
Sen. McCaskill, Claire [D-MO] · D–MO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate
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 11, 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 S.1734 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 S.1734 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 S.1734 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 S.1734 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.