Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 13, 2025
Early Participation in Regulations Act of 2025
This bill directs agencies to publish an advance notice of a proposed rulemaking at least 90 days before publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking for a major rule. A major rule is a rule that the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines is likely to impose (1) an annual economic effect of $100 million or more; (2) a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, government agencies, or geographic regions; or (3) significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, health, safety, the environment, or the ability of U.S. enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
The advance notice must
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
include a description of the problem the rule may address, alternatives under consideration, and the legal authority for proposing the rule; and
solicit and provide at least 30 days for submission of written data, views, and argument from interested persons.
Any difference between such advance notice and the notice of proposed rulemaking may not be considered arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law for the purposes of review under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Advance notice is not required if the proposing agency is not required to publish notice of proposed rulemaking or OIRA finds that advance notice is (1) not in the public interest, (2) duplicative of a similar process, (3) not practicable due to a required deadline, or (4) for a rule that is routine or periodic in nature.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 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 S.77 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.77 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.77 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.77 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.