Unfunded Mandates Accountability Act of 2017

Summary: Unfunded Mandates Accountability Act of 2017 This bill revises rulemaking requirements under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) to: (1) require federal agencies to prepare and publish in the Federal Register an initial and final regulatory impact analysis prior to promulgating any proposed or final rule that may have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more (adjusted for inflation); (2) make consideration of the least burdensome alternative to a rule mandatory and require the selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative; (3) exempt from such requirements rules that concern monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee; and (4) expand judicial review of agency rulemaking.  The bill amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to extend such Act's requirements to independent regulatory agencies. 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Unfunded Mandates Accountability Act 
of 2017''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress finds the following:
            (1) The public has a right to know the benefits and costs 
        of regulation. Effective regulatory programs provide important 
        benefits to the public, including protecting the environment, 
        worker safety, and human health. Regulations also impose 
        significant costs on individuals, employers, and State, local, 
        and tribal governments, diverting resources from other 
        important priorities.
            (2) Better regulatory analysis and review should improve 
        the quality of agency decisions, increasing the benefits and 
        reducing unwarranted costs of regulation.
            (3) Disclosure and scrutiny of key information underlying 
        agency decisions should make the Federal Government more 
        accountable to the public it serves.

SEC. 3. REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSES FOR CERTAIN RULES.

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 
1532) is amended--
            (1) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
        following:

``SEC. 202. REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSES FOR CERTAIN RULES.'';

            (2) by redesignating subsections (b) and (c) as subsections 
        (d) and (e), respectively;
            (3) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
    ``(a) Definition.--In this section, the term `cost' means the cost 
of compliance and any reasonably foreseeable indirect costs, including 
revenues lost, as a result of an agency rule subject to this section.
    ``(b) Regulatory Impact Analyses.--
            ``(1) Requirement.--Before promulgating any proposed or 
        final rule that may have an annual effect on the economy of 
        $100,000,000 or more (adjusted for inflation), or that may 
        result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal 
        governments, in the aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more 
        (adjusted for inflation) in any 1 year, the agency promulgating 
        the rule shall prepare and publish in the Federal Register an 
        initial and final regulatory impact analysis with respect to 
        the rule.
            ``(2) Initial regulatory impact analysis.--An initial 
        regulatory impact analysis required under paragraph (1) shall--
                    ``(A) accompany the notice of proposed rulemaking 
                with respect to the rule that is the subject of the 
                analysis; and
                    ``(B) be open to public comment.
            ``(3) Final regulatory impact analysis.--A final regulatory 
        impact analysis required under paragraph (1) shall accompany 
        the final rule that is the subject of the analysis.
    ``(c) Content.--Each initial and final regulatory impact analysis 
prepared and published under subsection (b) shall include, with respect 
to the rule that is the subject of the analysis--
            ``(1)(A) an analysis of the anticipated benefits and costs 
        of the rule, which shall be quantified to the extent feasible;
            ``(B) an analysis of the benefits and costs of a reasonable 
        number of regulatory alternatives within the range of the 
        discretion of the agency under the statute authorizing the 
        rule, including alternatives that--
                    ``(i) require no action by the Federal Government; 
                and
                    ``(ii)(I) use incentives and market-based means to 
                encourage the desired behavior;
                    ``(II) provide information based upon which the 
                public can make choices; or
                    ``(III) employ other flexible regulatory options 
                that permit the greatest flexibility in achieving the 
                objectives of the statute authorizing the rule; and
            ``(C) an explanation of how the rule complies with the 
        requirements of section 205;
            ``(2) an assessment of the extent to which--
                    ``(A) the costs to State, local, and tribal 
                governments may be paid with Federal financial 
                assistance (or otherwise paid for by the Federal 
                Government); and
                    ``(B) Federal resources are available to carry out 
                the rule;
            ``(3) estimates of--
                    ``(A) any disproportionate budgetary effects of the 
                rule upon any particular--
                            ``(i) regions of the United States;
                            ``(ii) State, local, or tribal governments;
                            ``(iii) types of communities, including 
                        urban or rural communities; or
                            ``(iv) segments of the private sector; and
                    ``(B) the effect of the rule on job creation or job 
                loss, which shall be quantified to the extent feasible; 
                and
            ``(4)(A) a description of the extent of the prior 
        consultation of the agency under section 204 with elected 
        representatives of each affected State, local, or tribal 
        government;
            ``(B) a summary of the comments and concerns that were 
        presented to the agency orally or in writing by State, local, 
        or tribal governments; and
            ``(C) a summary of the evaluation by the agency of the 
        comments and concerns described in subparagraph (B).'';
            (4) in subsection (d), as so redesignated, by striking ``a 
        statement under subsection (a) is required, the agency shall 
        include in the promulgation a summary of the information 
        contained in the statement'' and inserting ``an analysis under 
        subsection (b) is required, the agency promulgating the rule 
        shall include in the promulgation a summary of the information 
        contained in the analysis''; and
            (5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking 
        ``any statement required under subsection (a) in conjunction 
        with or as a part of any other statement or analysis, provided 
        that the statement or analysis satisfies the provisions of 
        subsection (a)'' and inserting ``any analysis required under 
        subsection (b) in conjunction with, or as a part of, any other 
        statement or analysis if the other statement or analysis 
        satisfies the requirements of subsections (b) and (c)''.

SEC. 4. LEAST BURDENSOME OPTION OR EXPLANATION REQUIRED.

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531 
et seq.) is amended by striking section 205 (2 U.S.C. 1535) and 
inserting the following:

``SEC. 205. LEAST BURDENSOME OPTION OR EXPLANATION REQUIRED.

    ``Before promulgating any proposed or final rule for which a 
regulatory impact analysis is required under section 202, an agency 
shall--
            ``(1) identify and consider a reasonable number of 
        regulatory alternatives within the range of the discretion of 
        the agency under the statute authorizing the rule, including 
        the alternatives described in section 202(c)(1)(B); and
            ``(2) from the alternatives identified and considered under 
        paragraph (1), select the least costly, most cost-effective, or 
        least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of 
        the statute.''.

SEC. 5. INCLUSION OF APPLICATION TO INDEPENDENT REGULATORY AGENCIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 421(1) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974 (2 U.S.C. 658(1)) is amended by striking ``, but does not include 
independent regulatory agencies''.
    (b) Exemption for Monetary Policy.--The Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) is amended by inserting after 
section 5 the following:

``SEC. 6. EXEMPTION FOR MONETARY POLICY.

    ``Nothing in title II, III, or IV shall apply to rules that concern 
monetary policy proposed or implemented by the Board of Governors of 
the Federal Reserve System or the Federal Open Market Committee.''.

SEC. 6. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

    Title IV of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 is amended by 
striking section 401 (2 U.S.C. 1571) and inserting the following:

``SEC. 401. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

    ``(a) In General.--A person that is aggrieved by final agency 
action in adopting a rule that is subject to section 202 is entitled to 
judicial review of whether the agency complied with section 202(b), 
202(c)(1), or 205 with respect to the rule.
    ``(b) Scope of Review.--Chapter 7 of title 5, United States Code, 
shall govern the scope of judicial review under subsection (a).
    ``(c) Jurisdiction.--Each court that has jurisdiction to review a 
rule for compliance with section 553 of title 5, United States Code, or 
under any other provision of law, shall have jurisdiction to review a 
claim brought under subsection (a).
    ``(d) Relief Available.--In granting relief in an action under this 
section, a court shall order the agency that promulgated the rule that 
is under review to take remedial action consistent with chapter 7 of 
title 5, United States Code.''.

SEC. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    This Act shall take effect on the date that is 90 days after the 
date of enactment of this Act.