Annenberg Classroom - Speak Outs - Clash of the Branches: Should Congress approve executive branch regulations?

Home • Speak Outs • Clash of the Branches: Should Congress approve executive branch regulations?

Speak Outs

Speak Out

Clash of the Branches: Should Congress approve executive branch regulations?

By Jeremy Quattlebaum, Student Voices staff writer

In early December, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would stop any regulation issued by a federal agency unless approved by Congress and the president.

The legislation, titled Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, was sponsored by Rep. Geoff Davis of Kentucky and supported by 200 other representatives who say that the legislation would cut down on unnecessary federal regulations that are hurting small businesses.

Under the bill, if Congress does not approve a major regulation within 70 session days, the rule cannot take effect. If no one in the House brings up the rule for a vote in the 70-day period, then the rule would not take effect. The bill also includes a provision that would prevent the Senate from using a filibuster to prevent a vote on a regulation, therefore extending the 70-day rule.

Now, agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency are broadly given authority to issue regulations by Congress and the detail work is left to the agency. The president oversees the drafting of regulations. Additionally, the president can issue an executive order that grants certain regulatory authority to an agency if the president deems that the agency has the right to regulate.

If the REINS Act becomes law, any regulation, no matter which agency issued it, would have to be approved by Congress in order for it to take effect.

Supporters say that the bill is necessary to curb the Obama administration’s attempts to get around legislating through Congress with executive orders, which they say are hurting small businesses.

“Too often (the Obama) administration has tried to regulate where they can’t legislate and the resulting regulatory regime has spun out of control,” Rep. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia said in a State Journal interview. “In West Virginia, the EPA has used rules and regulations to advance an anti-coal, anti-manufacturing and anti-natural gas agenda which has already cost our state thousands of jobs.”

Supporters also contend that the bill would make regulators accountable, taking away authority from unelected officials and putting their powers in the hands of elected officials.

Opponents of the bill argue that it takes away the authority to protect citizens from experts in the field, the regulators, and puts it in the hands of career politicians, who critics say have virtually no expertise in the different areas that need to be regulated.

“The REINS Act would undermine our ability to protect children from harmful toys, prevent asthma and lung ailments resulting from pollution, and ensure that our small businesses can compete fairly in the marketplace,” House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer said in a Washington Post article. “At the same time, it would force Congress to play a larger role in the regulatory process, leading to even more gridlock in Washington.”

What do you think?

Do you think the Regulation From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act should be enacted into law? Should agencies like the EPA be required to have its regulations approved by Congress? Is Congress overstepping its authority or is the REINS Act part of our system of checks and balances? Join the discussion and let us know what you think!

Join the Discussion

Your First Name:
Your Teacher/School:
Your City/State:
Your Comment: limited to 2000 characters including spaces

Thank you for commenting.
Your comment is awaiting approval.
Click here to view all Speak Outs

Comments

1/16/2012
Irving/TX

Yasmin
Bradley/Nimitz
I believe the Regulations From the Execution in Need Security Act should not be enacted. The "opportunity" that the Congress would be getting would not be fair nor inefficient. Clearly the Congress doesn't have time, shown by the 70 day rule. The Congress should focus on Congress duties and let the executive branch agencies come to federal decisions. It would be very inefficient to waste time waiting for the Congress's decision on different regulations. It would also not be fair for the Congress to pass or approve something that would negatively affect the public because the Congress wasn't informed on the detailed work. It should be left to agencies like the EPA and not Congress. Those agencies should be responsible for decisions in which they are experts in.

1/12/2012
Irving, Texas

Areli
Bradley/ Nimitz
I personally don't think that the REINS act should be enacted. A mimic of our "checks and balances", it does not guarantee that everything that they deem "acceptable" will be the right decision for our country and people. The EPA should be required to have regulations approved by congress because they might hurt our industries if they have it their way and Congress is overstepping its authority by wanting to be the line leader when they clearly just want power without being limited.

1/10/2012
Irving Texas

Jocelyn Erickson
Bradley/Nimitz
I don't think that the REINS Act should be passed because the president and congress don't know about certain things like the people who actually specialize in the government. The president and congress have bigger things to worry about, for example the debt crisis, which they can barely handle. But I do believe that agencies such as the EPA should be regulated. Congress is trying to overstep their authority because they are trying to take on more and more to "try" and help the US, but they are just adding more work for themselves. The REINS act is kind of like checks and balances but just giving the power to a certain group again.

1/10/2012
Irving/Texas

Mayra
Bradley/Nimitz
I do not believe that they should pass the Regulation From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act. First, they will give the power to Congress who do not know the environment of that particular state, and will not know that issues they are going through. Higher power does not know what is happening in the smaller towns, and they have other bigger issues going on that they will put the smaller issues aside which can be very important to the smaller people.

1/6/2012
Irving/Texas

Lauren
Bradley/Nimiitz
I do believe that the Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act should be enacted. This would ensure that unelected officials of agencies would not be able to carry out regulations without approval from the citizens (through our elected leaders). It is correct that officials in Congress may not have the “expertise” on certain subjects, which is why there are separate agencies However, this act does not take away the regulator's power. After all, those “experts” would still be monitoring their issues and would still have the opportunity to present laws that they feel would be beneficial to the country, and if their issue is relevant and they have clear and valid reasons/motives, then there should be no problem with passing the necessary law. This REINS Act is merely a clarification of our country's founding system of checks and balances, for modern times, and is needed to oversee the actions of certain agencies such as the EPA.

1/5/2012
Irving Texas

Taylor G
Bradley/ Nimitz
The Regulation From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act should not be enacted into law. Congress has been slow at times to respond to issues, the debt crisis in the past being one example. The EPA should not be required to be approved by Congress because they should be a separate body. The Congress is overstepping is authority and overextending its ability.