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 · Jan 21, 2015
Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act of 2015
States that the purpose of this Act is to increase accountability for and transparency in the federal regulatory process by requiring Congress to approve all new major regulations.
Revises provisions relating to congressional review of agency rulemaking to require a federal agency promulgating a rule to include in its report to Congress and to the Comptroller General a classification of the rule as a major or nonmajor rule.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires a joint resolution of approval of major rules to be enacted before such rules may take effect. Provides that if a joint resolution of approval is not enacted by the end of 70 session days or legislative days, as applicable, after the agency proposing the rule submits its report on such rule to Congress, the major rule shall be deemed not to be approved and shall not take effect. Permits a major rule to take effect for one 90-calendar day period without such approval if the President determines it is necessary because of an imminent threat to health or safety or other emergency, for the enforcement of criminal laws, for national security, or to implement an international trade agreement.
Sets forth the congressional approval procedure for major rules and the congressional disapproval procedure for nonmajor rules.
Requires the introduction of a joint resolution addressing a report classifying a rule as a major rule within three legislative days in the House of Representative and three session days in the Senate. Prohibits any amendments to such a joint resolution at any stage of the legislative process. Provides for expedited consideration of a joint resolution of approval and requires a vote on such resolution in the Senate within 15 session days after it is reported by the committee to which it was referred, or after such committee has been discharged from further consideration of the resolution.
Allows a court to review whether an agency has completed the necessary requirements under this Act for a rule to take effect. Limits the effect of a joint resolution of approval of a major rule.
Prohibits an agency from allowing a major rule to take effect without the congressional review procedures set forth in this Act.
Amends the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 to provide that any congressional approval procedure set forth in this Act affecting budget authority, outlays, or receipts shall be assumed to be effective unless it is not approved in accordance with this Act.
People & committees
Sen. Paul, Rand [R-KY] · R–KY
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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.226 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.226 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.226 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.226 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.