H.R. 9329, Regulatory Deregulation and Enforcement Weakening. Quorum's AI analysis reads it as a net cost — and names who bears it.
H.R. 9329 · Net cost
What it does
This bill restructures the SEC by requiring cost-benefit analysis before new rules, mandating semiannual congressional testimony, transferring the independent Public Company Accounting Oversight Board into the SEC as a subordinate office, and imposing new procedural requirements on rulemaking (minimum comment periods, GAO audits of major rules, cumulative regulatory impact assessment). It also narrows SEC enforcement by treating related violations as a single violation for penalty purposes.
The analysis names securities firms and investment banks (reduced enforcement penalties, cost-benefit gatekeeping on pr — and 2 more groups — among the beneficiaries.
The cost
Cost-benefit analysis in Section 101 does not require SEC to prove rules are necessary—only that benefits exceed costs. This inverts the burden: SEC must now affirmatively justify every rule, giving industry a veto over protective measures deemed 'too expensive.' The Chief Economist becomes a gatekeeper.
The analysis put a high warning level on this bill. Transparency scores 65%, and the analysis found no provisions unrelated to the bill's subject.
Who is behind it
Filed by Ann Wagner. Cosponsored by Bill Huizenga, Pete Sessions, Troy Downing and Young Kim.
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.