Overview
Title
Consultation with State, Local, and Tribal Governments in Regulatory Policymaking; Request for Comments; Public Listening Sessions
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) wants to learn how they can work better with state, local, and Tribal governments when making new rules. They want people to share their thoughts by writing to them or talking in online meetings, like a big group chat, where everyone can share ideas.
Summary AI
The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) is asking for public feedback on how federal agencies work with State, local, and Tribal governments in making regulations. They are accepting written comments until January 17, 2025, and are hosting two online listening sessions in January 2025 to discuss issues related to these consultations. The goal of this initiative is to explore better ways to ensure effective communication and input from these governments, which may lead to recommendations for improved practices. Participants can register for the listening sessions by emailing ACUS by January 2, 2025.
Abstract
The Office of the Chair of ACUS is requesting public input on Federal agency processes for consulting with State, local, and Tribal governments when agencies engage in regulatory policymaking. ACUS is accepting written comments and will hold two virtual public listening sessions. Responses to this request may inform an ongoing ACUS project, Consultation with State, Local, and Tribal Governments in Regulatory Policymaking, which, if warranted, may recommend best practices for agencies to use.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The Federal Register document invites public participation on how federal agencies consult with State, local, and Tribal governments when making regulations. This request is made by the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), which aims to gather input that could lead to recommendations for more effective consultation practices. Participants are encouraged to submit written comments by January 17, 2025, and register for two listening sessions in early January 2025. These sessions will address issues related to consulting with different levels of government.
General Summary
The document highlights ACUS's initiative to improve communication between federal agencies and State, local, and Tribal governments during the process of creating regulations. Written feedback and virtual listening sessions are means to collect experiences, suggestions, and concerns regarding this consultation process. ACUS plans to analyze these inputs to potentially recommend best practices for more inclusive and effective policymaking.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One concern with the document is the complexity of language, particularly for readers who are not familiar with governmental processes. This complexity might limit participation by making it difficult for some individuals to fully comprehend the requirements and topics under discussion. Furthermore, the instructions for submitting comments and registering for listening sessions could be seen as cumbersome, potentially dissuading individuals from participating.
Another issue is the document's reference to multiple executive orders and memoranda without providing a clear summary of these directives, which might confuse those unfamiliar with these documents. Additionally, there is little information about the financial implications of conducting such consultations, which might raise concerns about potential waste of resources.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this initiative represents an opportunity for the public to influence how regulations are formulated, ensuring that local and tribal voices are heard. Effective consultation can lead to policies that are better informed by on-the-ground realities and more attuned to the diverse needs of different communities. However, the complexity and requirements for participation may limit the number of respondents, impacting the representativeness of the feedback.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State, local, and Tribal governments may experience both positive and negative impacts from this initiative. Positively, they have a platform to share their experiences and suggest improvements, which could lead to more respectful and understanding regulatory processes. On the negative side, the requirements to participate might be seen as a barrier, especially for smaller entities with limited resources. Moreover, there is a risk that sensitive information could be unintentionally disclosed, making participants wary of how their input is managed.
In summary, while the document outlines a potentially beneficial process for refining governmental consultation practices, clarity and accessibility could be improved to ensure broader and more effective engagement from all interested parties.
Issues
• Language in the document is generally clear, but participants unfamiliar with governmental procedural terminology may find some sections complex. It could benefit from simplification for broader accessibility.
• The detailed requirements for submitting comments and registering for listening sessions could be perceived as burdensome or may dissuade participation if individuals find the process cumbersome.
• The document does not specifically address potential budgetary implications or offer details on how costs associated with the consultation project will be managed, which might concern those evaluating for wasteful spending.
• The document broadly references prior executive orders and memoranda but does not consolidate or summarize these directives, which might confuse readers unfamiliar with these documents.
• There is an implicit assumption that commenters will know how to avoid including sensitive information in their comments, which could lead to accidental disclosure if not adequately understood by all participants.