The "SCRUB Act of 2025" aims to reduce regulatory burdens by requiring agencies to repeal existing rules when creating new ones, prioritizing reviews of costly regulations, and setting a goal to cut overall regulatory costs by at least 33% by 2026.
Joni Ernst
Senator
IA
The "SCRUB Act of 2025" aims to reduce the economic burden of federal regulations by requiring agencies to repeal existing rules when creating new ones, prioritizing cost savings. It mandates a review of existing regulations, targeting a 33% reduction in regulatory costs by 2026, and requires agencies to include review plans for new rules to ensure regular evaluation and potential repeal. The Act also allows for judicial review of agency compliance and takes effect immediately upon enactment.
SCRUB Act of 2025: Slash 33% of Federal Regulations by July 4, 2026, or Face Court Challenges
The "Searching for and Cutting Regulations that are Unnecessarily Burdensome Act of 2025," or SCRUB Act, aims to significantly cut down on federal regulations. Basically, it's a 'one in, one (or more) out' system for regulations, plus a big push to review and potentially ditch existing ones.
Regulation Game Change
The core of the SCRUB Act is simple: if a government agency wants to introduce a new rule, it must find and eliminate existing rules that cost the economy at least as much as the new one. The United States DOGE Service (yes, that's in the bill, defined in SEC. 2) will be the judge of these costs, and they're only allowed to count the monetized costs (SEC. 101). Think dollars and cents – things like environmental benefits or public health improvements that are hard to put a price tag on might not get the same weight. If an agency can't find enough rules to cut, they can't issue the new one, unless they get a specific exemption.
The Real-World Rollout
Imagine a small business owner drowning in paperwork. This bill could mean less red tape. But it also means that regulations designed to, say, protect worker safety or prevent pollution could be on the chopping block if they're deemed too expensive in purely monetary terms. For example, if the EPA wants to introduce a new rule limiting a specific pollutant, they might have to repeal existing clean air or water regulations to offset the cost. The bill also sets a hard deadline: reduce the total cost of federal regulations by at least 33% by July 4, 2026 (SEC. 201). That's a massive cut in a short time, potentially leading to rushed decisions.
Who Feels It, and How?
Businesses, especially smaller ones, might see some relief from compliance costs. But it's not all sunshine and roses. The bill prioritizes cutting rules that are over 15 years old, have high paperwork burdens, or disproportionately affect small businesses (SEC. 201). This sounds good, but it could also mean gutting regulations that have been protecting us for years, simply because they're old or complex. The bill does allow court challenges if agencies don't follow the new rules (SEC. 301), but that's a reactive measure, not a preventative one. If this bill becomes law, it will take effect immediately (SEC. 302).
Challenges and the Big Picture
One major challenge is accurately calculating the cost of a regulation without fully accounting for its benefits. A regulation might cost businesses money, but it might also save lives or prevent environmental damage – benefits that are harder to quantify. Another issue is the sheer speed of the proposed cuts. Agencies might be forced to make quick decisions without fully understanding the long-term consequences. The bill also requires every new rule to come with a built-in review plan, due within 10 years (SEC. 202). This is supposed to ensure ongoing scrutiny, but it also adds another layer of bureaucracy to the process. There is a provision in the bill that prevents agencies from reissuing a repealed rule, in the same form, unless there is a new law passed to do so. (SEC. 201).