(Developing: Will be updated as warranted)
Gov. Laura Kelly on Friday vetoed a bill giving lawmakers oversight of costly rules and regulations adopted by state agencies, saying that voters already rejected a similar measure at the ballot box two years ago.
The bill, she said, “would insert bureaucratic red tape intended to legislatively interfere with the timely implementation of necessary and important rules and regulations,” she said.
“Many of these regulations are for the protection and safety of Kansans,” the governor said.
“Kansans voted ‘no’ to giving the legislature veto power over rules and regulations in the November 2022 election. This is yet again another attempt by the legislature to undermine the will of the voters.”
The bill would require the Legislature to ratify rules if the anticipated compliance costs passed on to businesses, local governments or individuals exceed $1 million for the first five years of implementation.
The bill also would give the budget director the authority to reject regulations if an agency fails to submit a complete economic impact statement.
The bill passed 82-36 in the House and 27-13 in the Senate.
Alan Cobb, president and CEO of the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, said Kansas was one 16 states that does not have legislative oversight of state agency regulations.
The vetoed bill, he said, “protects against a runaway executive branch which attempts to circumvent laws through regulatory changes.”
“Regulatory oversight is a bipartisan issue and we encourage lawmakers to override Gov. Kelly’s veto of this bill,” Cobb said in a startement.
During debate on the floor, Republican state Sen. Brenda Dietrich of Topeka said the bill would “bring some much-needed accountability” to state agencies by requiring them to consider their cost.
“It’s going to ensure that only those regulations, which have been carefully crafted, are advanced,” Dietrich said when the bill was debated on the floor.
Democratic state Sen. Usha Reddi of Manhattan opposed the bill.
“When our state agencies put forth certain rules and regulations and there are certain limitations, I have to think that they are the experts in the field and are probably listening across the board to what they need to change or what needs to be modified,” Reddi said when the bill was debated.
“I want to be cautious when we remove our state agencies from some of the responsibilities that they are held to,” Reddi said
“There is a place for us, and I think it’s probably appropriate where it is right now.”
Under the current law, agency administrative rules that are projected to cost more than $1 million over two years must go to the budget director for approval.
After June 30 of this year, rules expected to cost $3 million covering a two-year period must go to the budget director for approval.
The law comes after voters in 2022 narrowly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have empowered the Legislature to veto rules and regulations.
The amendment was put on the ballot in an effort to rein in administrators from writing policy into administrative rules and regulations.
Currently, the budget office and the attorney general’s office review proposed rules.
They’re also reviewed by the Legislature’s Committee on Administrative Rules and Regulations.
The attorney general can – and has – stopped rules for legal reasons, but the legislative committee cannot block regulations proposed by an executive branch agency because they might be too burdensome on business, local government or individuals.
When Jeff Colyer was governor in 2018, he signed a bill into law that required state agencies to conduct economic impact studies to understand the fiscal impact of the rules and regulations that they promulgated.
Supporters of the bill said members of the joint committee on rules and regulations have voiced concern about incomplete economic impact statements, and there is no way to hold agencies accountable for the fallout of their regulations.
Lawmakers were presented with a copy of an economic impact statement submitted by the Department of Labor in 2021 dealing with workers’ compensation that lacked specificity or with answers to questions that were not applicable.
Supporters said the document reflected that many times, the submitted economic impact statements don’t show “any real dollar amount or data or analysis on who is going to be impacted and what it costs.”
Fiscal analysts reported that during 2023, five state agencies submitted five groups of rules and regulations with compliance costs of more than $1 million.
The agencies included the Department for Aging and Disability Services, the Department of Health and Environment, the Department of Transportation, the Board of Indigent Defense Services, and the Department of Wildlife and Parks.
