Oklahoma imposes more state regulations than the majority of U.S. states, due in part to a review process that currently allows little time for lawmakers to thoroughly examine proposed agency rules.

That would change under two bills filed by the lawmakers who lead the state House and Senate committees on administrative rules.

The bills, known informally as “Rules from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny” (REINS) acts, would require thorough review and proactive legislative approval for agency rules to take effect that impose economic costs above a certain threshold.

“We have seen the unelected bureaucracy essentially create a fourth branch of government through the administrative rule process,” said state Rep. Gerrid Kendrix, R-Altus. “I have worked with Senator Bergstrom on a plan to slow that down with the REINS Act legislation we have worked on this last year. It is modeled after federal legislation initially created by Senator Mike Lee from Utah. This legislation will put a limitation on the state agencies’ ability to ‘legislate’ through the administrative rules process. That constitutional authority is vested in the Legislature.”

“When administrative rules become effective, whether by legislative action or indifference, they are in fact law,” said state Sen. Micheal Bergstrom, R-Adair. “As such they can have a detrimental impact on business, on individuals, and even on agency budgets. The proposed REINS Acts will require votes on any rule that has a significant financial impact. What the level of impact which triggers such a vote is to be negotiated and I am sure it will be much lower than currently in my bill at this time.”

House Bill 2728, by Kendrix, would create a Legislative Economic Analysis Unit (LEAU) that would provide Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) of major rules or major proposed rules within 15 legislative-session days of submission by a state agency.

The legislation defines “major rule” to include any agency rule with an annual economic impact of $200,000 or more or a significant impact on competition and employment within the economy.

Under HB 2728, a major rule with an impact of $200,000 or more cannot take effect unless it is “specifically approved by the Legislature” by a public vote in each chamber.

Senate Bill 318, by Bergstrom, would create a new division within the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency (LOFT) to conduct impact analyses of proposed agency rules.

Under SB 318, a “major rule” would be any proposed regulation with an annual economic impact of $1 million or more and/or an adverse effect on market competition.

In general, major rules would require legislative approval to take effect, and the Legislature would convene in a special session to take up proposed rules that are submitted outside the regular session, which is constitutionally limited to the months of February to May each year.

Although Oklahoma is generally considered a politically conservative state, it imposes an above-average regulatory burden on its citizens.

According to the 2024 edition of “Snapshots of State Regulations,” issued by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, Oklahoma is the 17th-most regulated state in the country with 142,313 regulations on the books. In comparison, Idaho, the nation’s least-regulated state, has just 31,497 regulations in place.

Oklahoma has more state regulations than traditionally liberal states such as Minnesota, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Oklahoma’s higher-than-normal level of regulation is due, in part, to a process that currently makes it all but impossible for state lawmakers to thoroughly review proposed rules during the four-month legislative session.

During a 2024 legislative study, Bergstrom noted that the Legislature is sent roughly 400 packets of proposed new agency rules each year with most packets running anywhere from 10 pages apiece to hundreds of pages in length.

Currently, lawmakers are required to proactively reject proposed rules. Otherwise, they go into effect.

Bad rules must be identified and rejected within the four-month legislative session, but the logistical challenges involved mean few regulations are taken up and rejected by lawmakers.

Kendrix and Bergstrom hope to flip that dynamic and make it much harder for bad regulations to take effect by requiring proactive approval of major regulations instead of explicit disapproval.

Wisconsin and Florida have had REINS laws in place for several years with significant success, according to experts.

The state of Florida reduced the number of annual proposed new regulations by 51 percent after adopting a REINS Act in that state. A Florida legislative study concluded that the REINS Act had effectively reduced regulatory costs by $2 billion since 2010 by preventing the adoption of many new regulations.