[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 78 (Monday, May 6, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H2842-H2844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   INFORMATION QUALITY ASSURANCE ACT

  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 7219) to ensure that Federal agencies rely on the best 
reasonably available scientific, technical, demographic, economic, and 
statistical information and evidence to develop, issue or inform the 
public of the nature and bases of Federal agency rules and guidance, 
and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 7219

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Information Quality 
     Assurance Act''.

     SEC. 2. INFORMATION QUALITY ASSURANCE.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter 1 of chapter 35 of title 44, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

[[Page H2843]]

  


     ``Sec. 3522. Information Quality Assurance.

       ``(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     the enactment of the Information Quality Assurance Act, the 
     Director shall--
       ``(1) with public and Federal agency involvement, update 
     the guidelines issued under subsection (a) of the Information 
     Quality Act--
       ``(A) to provide policy and procedural guidance to the 
     heads of Federal agencies for better ensuring and maximizing 
     the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of 
     influential information or evidence--
       ``(i) used by the heads of Federal agencies to develop or 
     issue rules and guidance; or
       ``(ii) disseminated to the public to inform the public 
     about the nature and bases of such rules and guidance; and
       ``(B) in a manner consistent with--
       ``(i) this chapter; and
       ``(ii) the amendments made by the Foundations for Evidence-
     Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-435); and
       ``(2) make the guidelines updated under paragraph (1) 
     available on the website of the Office of Management and 
     Budget.
       ``(b) Content of Guidelines.--In updating the guidelines 
     under subsection (a), the Director shall require that the 
     head of each Federal agency to which the guidelines apply, 
     not later than 1 year after the Director updates such 
     guidelines--
       ``(1) update any guidelines issued by the head of the 
     Federal agency under the Information Quality Act to ensure 
     that, in the case of influential information or evidence, the 
     best reasonably available information and evidence is relied 
     on in developing, issuing, or informing the public about the 
     rules and guidance of the Federal agency;
       ``(2) publish the guidelines updated by the head of the 
     Federal agency under paragraph (1) on the website of the 
     Federal agency;
       ``(3) ensure the administrative mechanisms established 
     under subparagraph (B) of section (b)(2) of the Information 
     Quality Act are available with respect to seeking and 
     obtaining the correction of any influential information or 
     evidence that the Federal agency uses to develop or issue a 
     rule or guideline, or disseminates to the public to inform 
     the public of the nature and basis of any rule or guidance of 
     the Federal agency, that does not comply with the guidelines 
     issued under paragraph (1); and
       ``(4) include in the report required under subparagraph (C) 
     of subsection (b)(2) of the Information Quality Act the 
     information described under that subparagraph with respect to 
     any complaints received by the Federal agency related to the 
     accuracy of influential information or evidence the Federal 
     agency uses to develop, issue, or inform the public of the 
     nature and bases of rules or guidance.
       ``(c) Public Disclosure.--
       ``(1) Availability.--Except as provided under paragraph 
     (2), the head of the Federal agency shall make available in 
     the docket for the rulemaking of any rule of the Federal 
     agency, or in the administrative record for any guidance, in 
     a timely manner before the promulgation of the rule or 
     issuance of the guidance document--
       ``(A) any model, methodology, or source of scientific, 
     technical, demographic, economic, or statistical information 
     or evidence upon which the head of the Federal agency--
       ``(i) relied on in developing or issuing such rule or 
     guidance; or
       ``(ii) proposes to rely on in developing or issuing such 
     rule or guidance; and
       ``(B) an identification of whether each such model, 
     methodology, or source constitutes, or may constitute, 
     influential information or evidence.
       ``(2) Exception.--
       ``(A) In general.--The head of the Federal agency--
       ``(i) shall implement paragraph (1) in a manner consistent 
     with this chapter and section 552a of title 5; and
       ``(ii) may not make available in the docket for the 
     rulemaking of any rule of the Federal agency, or in the 
     administrative record for any guidance, information that is 
     prohibited from being disclosed to the public under any 
     statute.
       ``(B) Explanation to be included in docket or 
     administrative record.--If the head of the Federal agency 
     does not make a model, methodology, or source available under 
     paragraph (1)(A) pursuant to paragraph (2)(A), the head of 
     the Federal agency shall include in the docket for the 
     rulemaking or the administrative record for the guidance 
     document--
       ``(i) an explanation as to why such information cannot be 
     made publicly available, including a citation to the 
     applicable law and policy; and
       ``(ii) a description of any steps being taken to increase 
     access to such information, even if the information cannot be 
     made public.
       ``(3) Format of source.--The head of each Federal agency 
     shall make any model, methodology, or source required to be 
     made available under paragraph (1)(A) available as an open 
     Government data asset.
       ``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Evidence.--The term `evidence' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 3561.
       ``(2) Influential information or evidence.--The term 
     `influential information or evidence' means information or 
     evidence (including scientific, technical, demographic, 
     economic, financial, and statistical information or evidence) 
     that the head of the Federal agency can reasonably determine 
     will have or does have a clear or substantial impact on--
       ``(A) developing or issuing a proposed or final rule of the 
     Federal agency; or
       ``(B) informing the public of the nature and basis of any 
     rule or guidance of the Federal agency.
       ``(3) Information quality act.--The term `Information 
     Quality Act' means section 515 of the Treasury and General 
     Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-554).''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for 
     subchapter I of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, 
     is amended by adding after the item relating to section 3521 
     the following:

``3522. Information Quality Assurance.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. LaTurner) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Raskin) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kansas.

                              {time}  1615


                             General Leave

  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on this measure.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Kansas?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, the Information Quality 
Assurance Act. Each year, thousands of regulations are imposed as an 
added burden on the American public. The Code of Federal Regulations, 
in which these rules are housed, spans 243 volumes that contain over 
180,000 single-spaced pages. Agency guidance explaining these 
regulations to the public likely spans millions more pages.
  If we must have rules imposed by Federal regulatory agencies, we 
should, at the very least, ensure that regulatory agencies rely on the 
best available information. Unfortunately, agencies frequently do not 
rely on the best available information to create their regulations.
  Year after year, the Federal courts are clogged with litigation 
brought by regulated parties who point out that Federal agencies have 
acted based on flawed information. Over the years, Congress has tried 
to improve the situation.
  In 2000, Congress enacted the Information Quality Act, which charged 
the Office of Management and Budget and each Federal agency to adopt 
guidelines to ensure agencies rely on high-quality information.
  In 2015, Congress enacted the Foundations of Evidence-Based 
Policymaking Act, expanding on the Information Quality Act to further 
ensure agencies use high-quality information.
  Still, disputes continue to arise over whether regulators are basing 
their decisions on the best quality information available. Every year, 
courts strike down agency rules that do not rely on adequate 
information. Every year, agency guidance that does not rely on the best 
information forces regulated parties down pathways that do not make 
sense.
  The Information Quality Assurance Act takes several major but 
straightforward steps to solve that problem. For the first time, it 
requires that the information on which agencies rest their rules and 
guidance be the best reasonably available information. It also includes 
several additional terms to make sure agencies are finally held to that 
standard.
  This legislation will improve the quality of agency decisionmaking, 
improve the acceptability of new rules and guidance, and avoid the need 
for many disputes over agencies' use of information to go to court.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I thank 
Representative McClain and Representative Porter for their work on this 
important bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Comment Integrity and 
Management Act.
  Technological advances have expanded access to Federal agencies' 
online rulemaking dockets and have made it easier for the public to 
comment on proposed rules. That is a very

[[Page H2844]]

good thing from the standpoint of transparency, accountability, and 
deliberation.
  At the same time, in some recent high-profile rulemakings, agencies 
have received an extraordinarily high volume of completely duplicative 
comments, which has created some challenges for agencies in processing 
them and managing their online rulemaking dockets.
  I am sure Members are familiar with receiving a standardized message 
hundreds or even thousands of times from constituents or people across 
the country.
  This bill is designed to help agencies manage such mass comments and 
computer-generated comments submitted in response to proposed rules. It 
is not intended in any way to discourage mass comments, which are 
indeed a vital part of the regulatory process. The bill would simply 
allow agencies to post a representative sample of mass comments. If 
they choose to do that, they would also be required to post the 
number--hold that thought, if you would, Mr. Speaker. I was describing 
the next bill. Forgive me. We got our papers confused here. Keep that 
in mind. I like that one, too.
  The Information Quality Assurance Act is bipartisan legislation 
introduced by Representatives Porter and McClain. I commend them for 
their work on it.
  It would require the Director of OMB to update guidance issued under 
the Information Quality Act. That guidance is more than 20 years old, 
and much work has been done by Congress and the executive branch on 
these issues in the interim. The Evidence-Based Policymaking Act, the 
DATA Act, and the OPEN Government Act are just a few new laws requiring 
updated guidance.
  Updated guidance would enable agencies to better ensure the quality 
of information and evidence used in promulgating regulations. The new 
guidance would ensure that the best reasonably available scientific, 
demographic, economic, financial, and statistical information is relied 
on during the regulatory process.
  The bill also continues the practices of the Information Quality Act 
that allow for public input on the information submitted and mechanisms 
for OMB to report any complaints to Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority for working closely with us and the 
administration in crafting this bill. The result is strong, and I fully 
support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for making that 
mistake so that when I make it here in a few bills, it will be easier 
for me.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. 
McClain).
  Mrs. McCLAIN. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be the sponsor of H.R. 7219, 
the Information Quality Assurance Act. I also thank Representative 
Katie Porter for partnering with me on this important piece of 
legislation.

  From my time in business, I can tell you that American employers and 
workers cannot afford for the Federal Government to impose new 
regulations and guidance on them that are misinformed, misconceived, 
and, quite frankly, backed by bad data.
  Regulations like that only harm the American people. They needlessly 
drain employers' resources, kill jobs, and cede economic victory to 
America's other competitors, like China.
  The same can be said of ill-informed and ill-conceived agency 
guidance. When an agency's guidance rests on flawed information, it 
risks sending regulated parties and their resources down rabbit holes 
just to avoid the threat of misguided agency enforcement actions.
  One of the most important ways we can make sure the Federal 
Government does not issue ill-informed regulations and guidance is 
also, quite frankly, one of the simplest. It is to require that Federal 
regulators base new regulations and guidance on the best reasonably 
available information.
  My Information Quality Assurance Act does just that. It requires 
three simple things.
  First and foremost, it requires agencies to use the best data 
possible in drafting regulations. This includes data on the impacts the 
regulation will have on the American people.
  Second, it requires the agency to make public, in a timely fashion, 
any model, methodology, or source of scientific, technical, 
demographic, economic, or statistical information which it intends to 
utilize in its rulemaking.
  Third, it makes sure the public has a chance to question whether that 
information is the best that is reasonably available.
  With these three simple commonsense reforms, we can make sure the 
Federal regulatory system avoids a mountain of mistakes that would 
unfairly burden the American people. That is what our job in Congress 
truly is: making the government more efficient so that we can help the 
most people.
  By making these three simple changes to how agencies utilize data, we 
can achieve that simple goal and make life better for people in this 
country.
  It is clear my colleagues on the other side of the aisle agree. This 
bill passed through the Oversight Committee--be careful to listen for 
it--with unanimous bipartisan support. That is the kind of thing this 
country needs right now.
  Mr. Speaker, I am proud to lead this bipartisan bill to improve the 
way our government works for generations to come, and I urge all of my 
colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. RASKIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time for 
closing.
  Despite the fact that I didn't know we were on this bill originally, 
we are in very strong and unanimous support on our side of the aisle 
for this, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this bill 
to ensure that agencies rely on the best reasonably available 
information to create their regulations.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Kansas (Mr. LaTurner) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 7219, as amended.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. LaTURNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________