Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act of 2017
Latest action. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Transparency and Honesty in Energy Regulations Act of 2017
This bill prohibits the Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of the Interior, the Department of Transportation, and the Council on Environmental Quality from considering the social cost of carbon, methane, nitrous oxide, or greenhouse gas as part of any cost benefit analysis in the rule making process, unless a federal law is enacted authorizing such consideration. They may also consider those social costs if they use an estimate that: (1) complies with the requirements of the "Circular A-4" document of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), (2) uses only the discount rates specified in that document, (3) considers only the domestic costs and benefits of the activity, and (4) has been reviewed by the OMB for compliance with the circular A-4 document and consistency across federal agencies.
The EPA must report on the number of proposed and final rulemakings, guidance documents, and agency actions since January 2009 that use those social costs, including as part of any cost benefit analysis required under Executive Order 12866 or other relevant authority.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in Senate" stage on June 29, 2017. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on June 29, 2017: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the Senate
- Passage by the House
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 115th Congress (2017-18), 442 of the 11,421 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 3.9 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
James Lankford (R-OK) introduced it on June 29, 2017, and 7 members have since signed on as cosponsors.
They are 7 Republicans.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on June 29, 2017, 3360 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 3360 days ago, on June 29, 2017.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 115th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2019 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- SenateIn committee, no floor vote yet
- HouseAwaits Senate passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers