Congress talked about regulatory reform. Wisconsin delivered it.
Despite the many positive aspects of the Big Beautiful Bill, which rightly focused on the need to address the nation’s debt in a meaningful way, final passage unfortunately failed to include a key provision that was initially approved by the House Committee on the Judiciary but ultimately stripped from the House version: REINS powers for Congress.
The REINS Act – Regulations of the Executive in Need of Scrutiny – originated in Congress. In 2009, a 78-year-old Tea Party activist handed a member of Congress a piece of paper that quoted Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution that contained a simple legislative proposal: “All rules, regulations, or mandates that require citizens, state or local government financial expenditures must first be approved by the U.S. Congress before they can become effective.” That member of Congress was Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., who introduced the first REINS Act on Oct. 8, 2009, during the 111th Congress. Since the first introduction, the REINS Act has been introduced and in some Congresses passed in the House, but has never passed the Senate.
These efforts at the federal level have led to increased interest from state lawmakers. In 2010, Florida enacted the first state level REINS Act. In 2024 Indiana and Kansas (over a gubernatorial veto) passed state versions and this year REINS has exploded at the state level, with Utah, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Wyoming, North Carolina and Kentucky (the latter three over gubernatorial vetoes) all joining the party. But one state stands out. Florida’s REINS law lacks the enforcement mechanisms found in stronger versions, and most of the newer state enactments are too recent to provide meaningful data on their impact. By contrast, Wisconsin’s adoption of the REINS Act in 2017 offers Congress a clear and instructive roadmap.
Earlier this year the Institute for Reforming Government partnered with the Center for Research on the Wisconsin Economy at the University of Wisconsin to objectively analyze the impact of the REINS Act on the Legislature’s ability to scrutinize the executive branch’s proposed rules. The result was a groundbreaking report that proves while the REINS Act should not be viewed as the silver bullet to address all deepstate shenanigans, it is indeed a powerful tool for the legislative branch to wrest back control over the rulemaking process that far too often places enormous burdens on businesses, individuals, and even other local units of government.
Among the report’s findings: The annual average number of permanent rules approved during the administration of former Gov. Scott Walker was significantly lower than during the prior administration of Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle. This was a result of not only the REINS Act, but other key administrative reforms championed by Governor Walker and legislative reformers. In the first year of the Walker Administration the number of permanent rules was reduced by almost 100. Even under the current progressive Evers administration, outside of 2019, the permanent rules approved during the Evers administration have at times been equal to or even lower than the Walker Administration average. While the average number of permanent rules passed during the Evers Administration could have been closer to the 2019 high of 166 (which would have far surpassed the Doyle Administration average), the average has instead remained below the Doyle Administration average and is actually closer to the less-than 100 average of the Walker Administration.
As Walker recently observed, “Many people don’t realize at the state and federal level there are so many examples where unelected bureaucrats go in and take actions that have the force of law even though the legislative body and chief executive haven’t signed off on them. We need to rein that in and put the power back in the hands of the voters – the hard working taxpayers and the people they duly elect. And that’s exactly what the REINS Act does.”
Unfortunately, the overall regulatory burden has continued to grow in Wisconsin since passage of the REINS Act. According to the Mercatus Center, Wisconsin remains the 13th most regulated state in the country, with 165,311 total regulations as of 2023. However, while the REINS Act may not have reduced the overall number of regulations that have gone into effect post-REINS, it has certainly played a critical role in identifying extremely costly regulations that failed to adequately factor in costs to industry, local units of government, or ratepayers. In just one example exposed by IRG, an initial agency estimate of annual compliance costs for a proposed nitrate rule came in at only $972,600. Industry experts estimated the compliance costs would in fact be between $340 million and $1.1 billion. And even the agency ultimately revised its initial estimate of annual economic impact to between $22.5 and $31 million.
Congress needs more tools in its toolbox to address the growing regulatory burden on Americans. The Mercatus Center has determined if the cost of regulatory accumulation, which is roughly $4 trillion annually in America, were a country, it would represent the fourth largest GDP in the world, behind the U.S., China, and Japan. Wisconsin has proven the REINS Act is a beautiful tool in the administrative reform toolbox. Congress would be wise to take up the REINS ACT following its failed efforts to include it in the BBB, once and for all reining in executive branch excess.
Jake Curtis is the General Counsel for the Institute for Reforming Government (“IRG”) and previously served as an agency Chief Legal Counsel in the Walker administration and as an elected Ozaukee County Supervisor.
