Kansas REINS-style state law
From Ballotpedia
| Administrative State |
|---|
|
| Five Pillars of the Administrative State |
| • Nondelegation • Judicial deference • Executive control • Procedural rights • Agency dynamics |
| Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia |
The Kansas REINS-style state law (House Bill 2648) is a REINS-style state law enacted by the Kansas State Legislature on April 29, 2024, over the veto of Kansas Governor Laura Kelly (D) that requires legislative approval of rules with implementation and compliance costs of $1 million or more over a five-year period.[1]
REINS-style state laws refer to state laws in the spirit of the federal Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act. These laws require legislative approval of proposed state agency rules that carry associated costs in excess of a certain monetary threshold.
The Kansas REINS Act includes the following provision:[1]
| “ |
If an economic impact statement required by K.S.A. 77-420, and amendments thereto, or a revised economic impact statement prepared pursuant to K.S.A. 77-416(b)(3), and amendments thereto, indicates that $1,000,000 or more in implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units and individuals as a result of the proposed rule and regulation over the initial five-year period following adoption of such rule and regulation, the state agency proposing such rule and regulation shall not adopt such rule and regulation unless such rule and regulation has been ratified by the legislature[2] |
” |
Background
- See also: Rulemaking, REINS Act
The federal REINS Act, which the Kansas state version was modeled on, was initially designed by Tea Party activist Lloyd Rogers in 2009. Rogers contacted former U.S. Representative Geoff Davis (R-Ky.) to propose legislation requiring that "all rules, regulations, or mandates that require citizens, state or local government financial expenditures must first be approved by the U.S. Congress before they can become effective." The proposal was incorporated into the Republican Party's Pledge to America legislative agenda leading up to the 2010 election cycle and was later introduced as legislation. It has since been introduced in the 112th Congress (2011-2013) through the 118th Congress (2023-2025).[3][4]
Legislative history
The REINS Act was introduced into the Kansas House of Representatives on January 31, 2024, by the Committee on Commerce, Labor and Economic Development as House Bill (HB) 2648. After passing the state house on March 6, 2024, and the state senate on March 27, 2024, HB 2648 was vetoed by Governor Laura Kelly (D) on April 25, 2024. The Kansas State Legislature voted on April 29, 2024, to override the governor's veto.[1]
Below is an abbreviated timeline of the legislative history of the Kansas REINS Act:[1]
- January 31, 2024: HB 2648 was introduced to the Kansas House of Representatives by the Committee on Commerce, Labor and Economic Development and referred to the committee.
- February 21, 2024: The committee released a report recommending passage of HB 2648 as amended by the committee.
- February 22, 2024: The bill was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
- March 6, 2024: The bill passed the Kansas House of Representatives as amended with a vote of 82-36.
- March 7, 2024: The bill was referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce.
- March 27, 2024: The bill passed the Kansas State Senate with a vote of 27-13.
- April 25, 2024: The bill was vetoed by Governor Laura Kelly (D).
- April 29, 2024: The House voted to override the governor's veto with a vote of 87-38 and the Senate voted to override the governor's veto with a vote of 27-12.
Provisions
The sections below contain a series of quotes explaining the major provisions of the law, according to a supplementary note prepared by the Kansas State Legislature. The quotes outline the proposed changes in the law that impact the process for adopting administrative rules and regulations.[5]
Economic impact statement
The following section outlines requirements for legislative approval of proposed rules with estimated implementation and compliance costs of $1 million or more over five years:[5]
| “ |
The bill would generally prohibit the adoption of any rule or regulation that the economic impact statement indicates $1.0 million or more in implementation or compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governments, or individuals during the initial five-year period following the adoption of the rule or regulation, unless the rule or regulation has been ratified by the Legislature by the enactment of a bill authorizing such rule or regulation. Any member of the Legislature would be authorized to introduce such legislation.
'Implementation and compliance costs' would be defined to mean direct costs that are readily ascertainable based upon standard business practices, including, but not limited to, fees, the cost to obtain a license or registration, the cost of equipment required to be installed or used, additional operating costs incurred, the cost of monitoring and reporting, and any other costs to comply with the requirements of the proposed rule and regulation.
The bill would require the economic impact statements filed with proposed rules and regulations to include a determination whether the rule or regulation would result in such costs in excess of $1.0 million in the first five years following adoption of the rule and would eliminate a requirement that such statements include similar determinations over two-year periods.
State agencies prohibited from adopting rules and regulations pursuant to this limitation would be authorized to modify the proposed rule or regulation and prepare a revised economic impact statement. The adoption of the modified rule or regulation would be authorized if the $1.0 million limitation is not anticipated to be exceeded by the modified rule or regulation.
This requirement would not apply to temporary rules and regulations, rules and regulations proposed because of a federal mandate, or rules and regulations of the Kansas Agricultural Remediation Board.[2] |
” |
Duties of the director of the budget
The following section outlines duties of the director of the budget regarding review of economic impact statements:[5]
| “ |
The bill would require the Director of the Budget (Director), in reviewing the economic impact statements for proposed rules and regulations, to conduct an independent analysis to determine the agency has complied with the requirements for economic impact statements and review the agency’s determination of the amount of implementation and compliance costs reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governments, and individuals over the initial five-year period following adoption of the rule or regulation.
If such costs do not exceed $1.0 million, the Director would be required to approve rules and regulations if the Director independently determines the economic impact statement is a complete analysis and the Director concurs with the economic impact statement and disapprove the rule if the economic statement is incomplete or contains substantive inaccuracies.
If such costs do exceed $1.0 million, the Director would be required to approve rules and regulations if the proposed rule or regulation has been ratified by the Legislature and disapprove the proposed rule and regulation if the economic impact statement is incomplete or contains substantive inaccuracies.
The Director’s reports to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules and Regulations would be required to include information regarding rules and regulations denied due to exceeding the $1.0 million requirement provided by the bill.[2] |
” |
Legislative post audit study of economic impact statements
The following section outlines a requirement to eliminate the legislative post audit study of economic impact statements:[5]
| “ |
The bill would eliminate a requirement that the Legislative Division of Post Audit conduct an audit in 2026 to study the accuracy of economic impact statements submitted with proposed rules and regulations, the impact of the review of the Director on the accuracy of such statements, and the appropriate amount of economic impact to trigger additional rules and regulations hearing procedures.[2] |
” |
Noteworthy events
Kansas Fire Marshal Mark Engholm on November 25, 2024, reported to the Legislative Budget Committee about challenges with updating the state’s fire code. Engholm argued the state's REINS-style law created challenges that hindered the effort.
Engholm said it was difficult to estimate the economic impacts of fire codes—a requirement for every new rule under the REINS law. He stated, “It’s very difficult for us to say how a fire code would economically impact [entities] across the state.” Kansas currently uses the 2006 version of the International Fire Code, making it the oldest code used by any state.[6]
State Reps. Chris Croft (R), Dan Hawkins (R), and Blake Carpenter (R) supported passing the state's REINS-style law, arguing, "Many of [Kansas'] rules and regulations, that are put in place by unelected agency bureaucrats, end up costing taxpayers big money. By overriding the governor's misguided veto today, we're putting an extra set of guardrails on the big government spending of the rules and regulations process and standing up for Kansas taxpayers."
Kansas enacts state-level REINS Act (2024)
The Kansas State Senate voted 27-12 on April 29, 2024, to override Governor Laura Kelly’s (D) veto of House Bill 2648—a bill to require legislative approval of administrative rules with implementation and compliance costs of $1,000,000 or more over a five-year period.
The bill is a REINS-style state law, which is a legislative proposal modeled after the federal REINS Act. It is designed to increase legislative oversight of administrative agency rulemaking by requiring legislative approval of agency regulations with certain financial or economic impacts before the regulations become effective.
Elizabeth Patton, the Kansas state director of Americans for Prosperity, released a statement arguing that the “vote to override the Governor’s veto is a triumph for common sense and accountability in government. This action will stimulate economic growth, encourage entrepreneurship, and create more jobs across our state.”[7]
Kelly wrote in her veto message on April 12 that the act “would insert bureaucratic red tape intended to legislatively interfere with the timely implementation of necessary and important rules and regulations. Many of these regulations are for the protection and safety of Kansans.”[8]
See also
- REINS Act
- REINS Act (Wisconsin)
- Florida REINS-style state law
- Indiana REINS-style state law
- REINS-style state laws
- Rulemaking
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Kansas 2023-2024 Legislative Sessions, "HB 2648," accessed May 20, 2024
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ The Jackson Sun, "We were never closer to seeing REINS Act become law," January 4, 2017
- ↑ Boston Herald, "Smith: Congress can regain power with REINS," January 6, 2017
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 Kansas State Legislature, "Supplemental Note on House Bill No. 2648," accessed May 21, 2024
- ↑ The Topeka Capital-Journal, "Kansas has the oldest fire code in country. An update was 'derailed' by new law," November 29, 2024
- ↑ Americans for Prosperity Kansas, "VICTORY: Senate Successfully Overrides Governor Kelly's Veto of the REINS Act," April 29, 2024
- ↑ Kansas Office of the Governor, "Governor Kelly Vetoes Bills, Allows One to Become Law Without Signature," April 12, 2024
