After three failed attempts to cut off debate, the Senate Republican leadership, last July, suspended floor action indefinitely on the regulatory reform bill (S. 343), which had been stalled for months by partisan disagreement. Unless a compromise can be reached between Democratic and Republican leaders, it is unlikely the bill will be rescheduled for floor action this year.
While Democrats support the key provisions of the bill which would require federal agencies to conduct a series of risk assessments and cost-benefit analyses before issuing new regulations, they oppose a number of stringent provisions added by Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.).
Dole added the provisions to strengthen the bill by expanding opportunities for regulated parties to sue federal agencies for not complying with administrative procedures and by allowing individuals to petition agencies to modify or revoke regulations.
Democrats argued that these provisions would make it difficult for federal agencies to enforce rules that protect public health, safety and the environment. Republicans countered by arguing that the stronger provisions are needed to discourage overregulation by federal agencies.
NACo firmly supports the enactment of legislation requiring federal agencies to conduct risk assessments and cost-benefit analyses before issuing new regulations. Regulatory reform is a top priority of the association and NACo will make every effort to get members to agree on a compromise and enact a strong bill.
On Jan. 1 of this year, the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act went into effect, establishing a number of procedural roadblocks designed to make it more difficult for Congress to impose new unfunded federal mandates on state and local governments.
Under the act, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) must prepare a cost estimate for any newly proposed mandate expected to cost $50 million or more before it is considered on the House or Senate floor.
The act also requires Congress to provide federal funds to pay for such mandates or take a separate recorded vote to waive the requirements of the bill and thereby impose the cost on state and local governments. A majority vote is required in both chambers to waive the requirements.
The key to effectively implementing the new law is getting a good cross section of cities, counties and states to provide reliable cost estimates to the CBO in a timely manner.
To facilitate this process, NACo has developed a mandates manual, which is being distributed to more than 1,500 counties nationwide urging them to join NACo’s Cost Estimation Network.
Counties volunteering to participate will be asked to pass a resolution in support of the network and to designate a mandate coordinator who will be responsible for collecting and sending cost data on proposed mandates to NACo.
Data from participating counties will be compiled by NACo and forwarded to the CBO. Armed with this data, NACo and its member counties will be able to inform members of Congress about the impact of proposed mandates and mount an effective lobbying campaign against the imposition of new costly mandates on state and local governments.
If passed, the Local Empowerment and Flexibility Act would give counties, cities and states increased flexibility to combine numerous federal categorical grants and receive a waiver from regulations that impede the effective delivery of services.
Under a five-year demonstration program, state and local governments would be allowed to adapt federal programs to the specific needs of their communities. To qualify, counties and other grant recipients would be required to develop a local flexibility plan that shows how services could be provided more efficiently and that identifies the rules that need to be waived. The plan must be submitted to the governor for comments and to a “Flexibility Council” at the federal level for final approval.
Hearings on the identical proposals were held by the House Human Resources Subcommittee on Feb. 22 and by the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee on Dec. 5, 1995. The House subcommittee plans to consider the proposal on March 12. No action has been scheduled by the Senate committee.
The measure has bipartisan support in both houses, and the sponsors of the legislation, Senator Mark O. Hatfield (R-Ore.) and Representative Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), are working with the White House to try to win the president’s support. NACo supports the legislation and is working closely with congressional staff to ensure its approval.
Funds for the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations have been eliminated for FY97, which begins on Oct. 1. The Office of Management and Budget has ordered the agency to prepare to close down by that date. Attempts were made in the House to block ACIR from receiving a $334,000 grant made available this year under the mandates-relief bill to complete a study on existing mandates. However, the Senate prevailed in convincing House members to allow ACIR to complete the study.
During the last three years, a number of members in both Houses have pushed for the elimination of funds for numerous independent federal agencies in order to reduce the federal deficit. With a huge influx of new members in 1994 and declining support for the agency, it became increasingly difficult to win support for continuous funding.
ACIR is the only federal agency that brings federal, state, county and city officials together to discuss and find answers to intergovernmental problems. Several senators are discussing the possibility of developing a proposal to reorganize and restructure the agency. NACo supports the continuation of ACIR.
Legislation was introduced by Representative Martin Hoke (R-Ohio) to impose restrictions on professional sports leagues that approve the relocation of a professional sport team from a community where the team has been located for at least 10 years.
Under the Fan Freedom and Community Protection Act, if a league approves the relocation of a team, restrictions would be imposed on the league’s ability to use the team name outside of the community from which the team is relocating, team owners would be required to notify local governments affected by the relocation 180 days prior to the move, and the league would be required to grant a new expansion team franchise to an investor identified by the community within a three-year period after a team has relocated.
A league that violates the last provision would be liable to the community for damages equal to three times the purchase price of the team.
The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the proposal on Feb. 6. No further action is scheduled at this time. NACo does not have a position on the bill.
(Prepared by Larry Jones, associate legislative director.)
This document was produced using an evaluation version of HTML Transit