[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H2245-H2247]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
INFORMATION QUALITY ASSURANCE ACT OF 2025
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6329) 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.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6329
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 of 2025''.
SEC. 2. INFORMATION QUALITY ASSURANCE.
(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 35 of title 44,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``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 of
2025, the Director shall--
``(1) update the guidelines issued under 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 made available to the public; 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; 132 Stat.
5529); and
``(2) make the guidelines updated under paragraph (1)
available on the website of the Office of Management and
Budget.
``(b) Content of Guidelines.--Not later than 1 year after
the Director updates the guidelines under subsection (a), the
head of each Federal agency to which the guidelines apply
shall--
``(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 that is
fit-for-purpose 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 subsection (b)(2) of the
Information Quality Act are made available, as applicable,
with respect to seeking and obtaining the correction of any
influential information or evidence disseminated by agencies
that the Federal agency uses to develop or issue a rule or
guidance made available to the public, or 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.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this section, the Director shall issue guidance,
which may be included in the guidelines updated under
subsection (a), that directs the head of the Federal agency
to make available, except as provided under paragraph (2), in
the docket for the rulemaking of any rule of the Federal
agency, or in the public administrative record for any
guidance--
``(i) the critical factual material upon which the head of
the Federal agency relied as part of the rulemaking or
guidance development process; and
``(ii) a citation to any other source used to inform the
rulemaking or guidance development process, including a
citation to any public comment that is referenced in a final
rulemaking action.
``(B) Process.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided under clause (ii),
the guidance required under subparagraph (A) shall direct an
agency to make available the information that must be made
available under that subparagraph as soon as reasonably
possible before, but at a minimum at, the time that the
Federal agency promulgates a rule or issues guidance.
``(ii) Notice and comment.--If a Federal agency engages in
notice and comment rulemaking under section 553 of title 5 or
provides for public notice and an opportunity to comment on
proposed guidance, the guidance required under subparagraph
(A) shall direct the Federal agency to provide notice and an
opportunity to comment on the critical factual material upon
which the head of the Federal agency relied.
``(C) Revisions.--If the critical factual material under
subparagraph (A)(i) is revised in a manner that may
materially affect the rulemaking or guidance after the public
is given notice and an opportunity to comment pursuant to
subparagraph (B)(ii), but before the rule or guidance is
published, the head of the Federal agency shall make the
revision available in the docket for the rulemaking or in the
applicable administrative record for the guidance in a timely
manner.
``(2) Implementation of public disclosure requirement
exceptions.--
``(A) In general.--The guidance under paragraph (1) shall
direct the head of the Federal agency--
``(i) to implement paragraph (1) consistent with this
chapter, sections 552 and 552a of title 5, and any rights
under titles 17 and 35;
``(ii) to implement paragraph (1) to the maximum extent
feasible, considering costs to the Federal Government; and
``(iii) in implementing paragraph (1), to not make
available in the docket for the rulemaking of any rule of the
Federal agency, or in the public administrative record for
any guidance, as applicable, information that is
[[Page H2246]]
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 critical factual material available under
paragraph (1), subject to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph,
the head of the Federal agency shall include in the docket
for the rulemaking or the public administrative record, if
applicable, for the guidance--
``(i) an explanation as to why such information cannot be
made publicly available; 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 critical factual material.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2) and
subparagraph (B), the head of each Federal agency shall make
available any critical factual material required to be made
available under paragraph (1)(A) as an open Government data
asset.
``(B) Exception.--If an exception under paragraph (2)(A)
applies, the head of a Federal agency may--
``(i) maximize public access to the critical factual
material to the extent permitted by law;
``(ii) make the critical factual material available by
citation or description; and
``(iii) place in the docket for the rulemaking or the
administrative record for the guidance a specification of the
identity of the entity that holds a legal right to prohibit
or limit reproduction, distribution, or public display of the
information and the means by which a member of the public may
request to obtain a full copy of the information from such
holder.
``(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 about which an agency can reasonably determine that
reliance on or dissemination of the information will have or
does have a clear and substantial impact on important public
actions, policies or statements or on important private
sector decisions.
``(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 Sections.--The table of sections 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.''.
(c) No Additional Funds.--No additional funds are
authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of carrying out
this Act or the amendments made by this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Timmons) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Subramanyam) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
General Leave
Mr. TIMMONS. 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 South Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6329, the Information Quality
Assurance Act of 2025.
Historically, thousands of Federal regulations have been imposed each
year 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 this 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 relied on high-quality information.
In 2015, Congress enacted the Foundations for Evidence-Based
Policymaking Act, expanding on the Information Quality Act to further
ensure agencies use high-quality information in their program
administration.
Still, year after year, disputes 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.
The Information Quality Assurance Act takes several major but
straightforward steps to solve that problem. For the first time, it
requires that the information which agencies use to form 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 and thank
Representative Lisa McClain for her reintroduction of this important
legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1630
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 6329. This is about improving
the quality and transparency of information Federal agencies use to
make rules.
The bill would require OMB to update their guidance to ensure
agencies use high-quality, reliable information when creating new
rules. That means the best scientific, technical, economic, or
statistical information available.
Agencies would also have to make public the models, methods, and
information sources they use in rulemaking. Anyone in the public can
then give feedback on the information agencies use. The bill requires
OMB to report any public complaints to Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Michigan (Mrs. McClain).
Mrs. McCLAIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my bill, the
Information Quality Assurance Act. This bill is common sense and
restores accountability, transparency, and trust in how the Federal
Government uses information to make decisions that impact the American
people.
Every day, Federal agencies issue regulations that affect our
workers, our small businesses, and our local communities. These
decisions can carry billions of dollars of economic consequences. Yet,
too often, those rules are based on incomplete data, outdated science,
or information that hasn't been properly reviewed for accuracy or
transparency. That is simply bad governing.
Americans deserve to know that when Washington bureaucrats act, they
are using reliable, high-quality information, not assumptions, not
political agendas, and not flawed data.
My bill strengthens safeguards to ensure Federal agencies rely on
data that meets clear standards for objectivity, integrity, and
accountability before new regulations move forward. This bill makes
government work better. It ensures decisions are guided by facts, and
it protects taxpayers from costly regulatory mistakes.
Businesses, job creators, and families deserve confidence that
Federal rules are grounded in reality and not bureaucracy. At its core,
this is about trust. It is about trust that government decisions are
fair, trust that agencies are transparent, and trust that the American
people come before politics.
The Information Quality Assurance Act reinforces a basic principle.
Better information leads to better policy, and better policy leads to
better outcomes for the American people.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud that this effort brings accountability back
into the rulemaking process, and I urge my colleagues to support this
commonsense legislation.
Mr. SUBRAMANYAM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the sponsor of this bill. This bill passed the
House
[[Page H2247]]
overwhelmingly last Congress, and I again urge my colleagues to support
the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TIMMONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this bill. It is a simple,
commonsense measure that is sure to improve the quality of Federal
rulemaking for our constituents.
In the 118th Congress, a similar version of this legislation passed
the House on an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 377-4. I urge my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in support of this
important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Goldman of Texas). The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Timmons)
that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 6329.
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. TIMMONS. 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.
____________________