WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HCR 2038

rulemaking; legislative ratification; regulatory costs

57th Legislature - First Regular Session Introduced by Alex Kolodin

HCR 2038 would require agencies to quantify anticipated regulatory costs and seek legislative ratification for costly rules, expanding oversight and possibly delaying rules.

DPA
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HCR 2038

Summary — HCR 2038

Title: rulemaking; legislative ratification; regulatory costs
Bill Type: Concurrent resolution
Bill No.: HCR 2038
Introduced: January 29, 2025
Status: DPA (Do Pass As amended) — House First Reading 2025-01-29; House Second Reading 2025-01-30; DPA actions 2025-02-04 and 2025-02-19

Note: The full text of HCR 2038 was not provided. The summary below explains the bill’s likely purpose and typical provisions based on its title and classification, and identifies what information is missing. Obtain the bill text and any committee reports or fiscal notes for authoritative detail.

Purpose (inferred)

Based on the title, HCR 2038 appears intended to change how administrative rulemaking is subject to legislative review, with a particular emphasis on the legislative ratification of rules that carry regulatory costs. The resolution likely seeks to increase legislative oversight of agency rules that impose financial impacts on private parties, local governments, or the state.

Key provisions (likely or typical elements)

Because the bill text is not provided, the following are common provisions found in measures with this scope. HCR 2038 may do one or more of the following:
- Require state agencies to quantify and report anticipated regulatory costs (e.g., to businesses, individuals, or local governments) before filing major rules.
- Set a threshold (dollar amount or significance test) above which a proposed rule must receive explicit legislative ratification or approval before taking effect.
- Establish a procedure and timeline for submitting rules and cost estimates to the legislature or a designated committee, and for legislative action (e.g., a joint resolution to ratify or reject).
- Provide exemptions (for emergencies, federal mandates, health/safety rules) and describe interim effect if ratification is pending.
- Direct agencies to prepare fiscal or economic impact statements and to consider less-costly alternatives.

Who would be affected

  • State executive branch agencies and rulemaking bodies — increased reporting and potential delay of rule implementation.
  • Regulated entities (businesses, professionals, non-profits) — additional opportunities for legislative oversight of costly rules; potential delays in regulatory changes.
  • Local governments — may see changes if rules affecting them are subject to different review.
  • Legislature — gains greater formal role in approving certain rules.
  • Citizens — potential benefits from greater scrutiny of costly rules, but possibly slower regulatory responses.

Procedural and timeline notes

  • The measure is a concurrent resolution, not a statute. Depending on state practice, concurrent resolutions may express legislative intent or be used for approval of certain administrative actions but may not have the same binding force as law. Consult the bill text to confirm legal effect.
  • Status entries show the resolution passed initial readings and received “DPA” recommendations in early February 2025; follow-up actions may include floor votes, referral to the other chamber, or final adoption.

Uncertainties and recommended next steps

  • The exact language, cost thresholds (if any), exceptions, enforcement mechanisms, and whether the resolution is binding are unknown without the bill text.
  • To evaluate impact and compliance requirements, obtain the bill text, committee analyses, and any fiscal impact statements.
  • Review legislative history and related statutes governing rulemaking and legislative oversight in your jurisdiction for context.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.