Legislative review of administrative rules and regulations : a review of American state legislatures and a case study of Tennessee's General Assembly

The purpose of this research was to analyze the impact of legislative review of administrative rules and regulations. It was found that in the past state legislatures have not exercised much control over the policies and procedures of state agencies. Rule review has been a popular method implemented by several state legislatures in order to increase their oversight of administrative activities.

The influence and scope of the rules and regulations promulgated by state agencies are frequently no different from the laws passed by the legislature and signed by the executives. In essence, this allows the administrative agency to make substantive governmental policy without public accountability. This scheme also reinforces legislatures' apparent willingness to pass significant issues on to the administrative agency.

Information gathered for this research came from several sources. In developing a rule review/oversight model an analysis of the research dealing with legislative oversight was used. State statutes and legislative journals were evaluated in the discussion of the rule review procedures found in American state legislatures. The investigation into Tennessee's experiences with rule review were obtained through interviews, taped recordings, transcripts of meetings, legislative journals, legal journals and personal observations.

This study is divided into five chapters. The first chapter lists the factors which have been found to be important in legislative oversight programs. These factors include the environment external to the legislature, the motivations of the individual legislator and the structure of the rule review process. The second chapter is concerned with the development of rule review in American state legislatures. It was found that state legislatures differ greatly in their approaches to rule review. In addition, it is seen that when state statutes are compared the anticipated strength of Tennessee's procedure is one of the highest in the nation.

The third chapter is an investigation of the passage and development of rule review in Tennessee. It is believed that the legislature's movement away from executive domination played a central role in the passage of a strong rule review procedure. The controversial issue of "overregulation" by administrative agencies also provided enthusiastic constituent support for the procedure. Since its enactment rule review has developed so that it has become a viable part of the legislative process in Tennessee. The fourth chapter is concerned with the actual behavior of the rule review committees in Tennessee. In this chapter it is discussed that rule review has had no noticeable impact on the number of rule sections promulgated by state agencies. An examination of the types of rules being rejected is also presented. Based on this examination it appears that the behavior of the review committees is directed

as much toward restricting business control over state agencies as it is toward agencies over-regulating businesses.

The final chapter of this study highlights and summarizes the impact of rule review. The basic idea presented in this chapter is that rule review will increase the accountability of the administrative agency, even if it occurs only through the anticipation of legislative analysis. In turn, rule review should also increase legislative responsibility by creating a system that requires legislative involvement in administrative rulemaking.