Saturday, December 02, 2006
OHIO H.B. 685 = PARTISAN GRIDLOCK
If it isn’t already, H.B. 685 should be on your radar. It’s a piece of legislation designed primarily it would appear to make life more difficult for the new Strickland administration.
H.B. 685 requires the executive branch to pay the legislature (the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review – JCARR) $50 each time that they submit a proposed or revised rule that changes any word of current code (remember by statute 20% of all administrative rules are subject to review every year). The money is to be deposited into a “rule fund” to be used by the committee to “defray the costs of their operations.” There is no explanation of how these funds would be spent, who would control the funds, or why there is a need for additional funds.
H.B. 685 requires the executive branch to prepare a very detailed description of the impact of a proposed rule on business. It requires the executive branch to provide a “description with reasonable particularity, of the Ohio businesses it reasonably appears that the proposed rule is likely to have a significant impact on.” I’m not sure I know what “reasonable particularity” means but it sounds like the executive branch would have to name every individual business in the state that might be impacted by a rule – a formula for gridlock.
H.B. 685 also allows just six members of the legislature (serving on JCARR) to delay any proposed rule for as along as 4 months, and perhaps indefinitely. Coincidentally, there are currently 6 Republican members of JCARR.
House State Government committee is hearing testimony on the bill on Tuesday, Dec. 5th at 1:00 pm in Room 018 of the Statehouse.The House State Government committee is scheduled to meet again on Thursday, Dec. 7th at 9:30 am in Room 122 of the Statehouse to take additional testimony and to vote the bill out of the committee.
H.B. 685 requires the executive branch to pay the legislature (the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review – JCARR) $50 each time that they submit a proposed or revised rule that changes any word of current code (remember by statute 20% of all administrative rules are subject to review every year). The money is to be deposited into a “rule fund” to be used by the committee to “defray the costs of their operations.” There is no explanation of how these funds would be spent, who would control the funds, or why there is a need for additional funds.
H.B. 685 requires the executive branch to prepare a very detailed description of the impact of a proposed rule on business. It requires the executive branch to provide a “description with reasonable particularity, of the Ohio businesses it reasonably appears that the proposed rule is likely to have a significant impact on.” I’m not sure I know what “reasonable particularity” means but it sounds like the executive branch would have to name every individual business in the state that might be impacted by a rule – a formula for gridlock.
H.B. 685 also allows just six members of the legislature (serving on JCARR) to delay any proposed rule for as along as 4 months, and perhaps indefinitely. Coincidentally, there are currently 6 Republican members of JCARR.
House State Government committee is hearing testimony on the bill on Tuesday, Dec. 5th at 1:00 pm in Room 018 of the Statehouse.The House State Government committee is scheduled to meet again on Thursday, Dec. 7th at 9:30 am in Room 122 of the Statehouse to take additional testimony and to vote the bill out of the committee.
