Periodic review before the House

A significant regulatory reform is among the items in the omnibus regulatory reform bill, S.B. 112, “Create Jobs Through Regulatory Reform,” before the House: periodic review.

S.B. 112’s proposal for periodic review is taken from H.B. 74, “Periodic Review and Examination of Rules,” which is discussed on pages 4 and 5 of my report on sunset laws and periodic review. A key feature of the bill’s proposed three-step process would require controversial rules that agencies nevertheless consider necessary to go through the rules adoption process as if they were new rules.

There are several reforms in this omnibus regulatory reform bill. Three other noteworthy changes would include:

  • making the rule-making process more efficient by having the fiscal note review process and public comment period of proposed new rules run concurrently.
  • calling upon the Program Evaluation Division “to evaluate the structure, organization, and operation of the various independent occupational licensing boards,” a study that would consider whether a single state agency could administer licensing, whether some boards should be combined, and whether some should be eliminated.
  • requiring county ordinances to be consistent with the Constitutions of North Carolina and the United States, as city ordinances are already required, and impose a no-more-stringent standard to city and county ordinances and prevent cities and counties from regulating in an environmental field already regulated by a state or federal statute.

Jon Sanders / Research Editor and Senior Fellow, Regulatory Studies

Jon Sanders studies regulatory policy, a veritable kudzu of invasive government and unintended consequences. As director of regulatory studies at the John Locke Foundation, Jo...