Overview
Title
Federal Management Regulation; Updating Transportation Management, With Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Language; Planned Rescission
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The GSA plans to cancel a rule they made to add fair and helpful language to how the government moves things around, but they are going to follow new orders from leaders who want the rules to be more like they used to be.
Summary AI
The General Services Administration (GSA) plans to issue a final rule that will cancel a previous rule, known as FMR Case 2024-03. This rule aimed to update transportation management with language supporting diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, and was published on November 26, 2024. The decision to rescind the rule aligns with two Executive Orders from January 2025 that aim to revert to traditional gender language and remove what the current administration considers unnecessary provisions. GSA's actions are part of an effort to comply with the current administration's priorities.
Abstract
GSA plans to issue a final rule rescinding Federal Management Regulation (FMR) Case 2024-03, "Federal Management Regulation; Updating Transportation Management, With Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Language," published on November 26, 2024.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register details a planned action by the General Services Administration (GSA) to rescind a specific rule concerning transportation management. This rule, known as FMR Case 2024-03, initially aimed to incorporate language emphasizing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in transportation management practices. The rule, published in late 2024, is now slated to be withdrawn as per the priorities of the current administration.
General Summary
The GSA intends to issue a final rule that will cancel the previously established FMR Case 2024-03. This move aligns with two Executive Orders issued in January 2025. These Executive Orders emphasize a return to traditional gender language and the removal of what the current administration deems unnecessary provisions within federal regulations. The document announces the notification of this upcoming rescission, providing contact information for further queries and directing readers to a website where the original rule can be reviewed.
Significant Issues or Concerns
The document presents several concerns. Firstly, it lacks a thorough explanation of why rescinding FMR Case 2024-03 is necessary, aside from the reference to new Executive Orders. This gap leaves readers without a full understanding of the motivations behind the rescission. Additionally, the language used in one of the Executive Orders, particularly concerning "Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism," could be perceived as politically charged, necessitating further clarification on its practical implications for transportation management.
Furthermore, there is scant information on what specific changes were made under FMR Case 2024-03 and how undoing these changes will impact transportation management. Importantly, the document does not mention whether stakeholders were consulted in this decision, which is vital for ensuring transparency and inclusivity. Lastly, the formatting in the section providing the web address complicates access, and the document omits any financial analysis or potential cost implications of rescinding the regulation.
Broad Public Impact
The decision to rescind FMR Case 2024-03 may have various effects on the public. By reverting to traditional gender language, there could be a perceived reduction in the emphasis on inclusive language, potentially affecting groups advocating for diversity and equity in government practices. For the general public, the decision may signify a shift in administrative priorities, reflecting broader policy changes that could influence other regulations in similar ways.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Specific stakeholders, such as government employees involved in policy development or those in advocacy groups promoting diversity and inclusion, might view this rescission negatively. They may see it as a step back from progressive language aimed at fostering a more inclusive work environment. Conversely, individuals or groups advocating for a return to traditional values may view this change positively, as it aligns with their preferences for less progressive regulation language.
Overall, while the document provides insight into administrative shifts within the GSA, it raises several questions that would benefit from additional clarity and transparency, particularly concerning stakeholder involvement and the substantive impact on transportation management practices.
Issues
• The document does not provide a clear explanation of why the rescission of FMR Case 2024-03 is necessary beyond the reference to the Executive Orders; more detailed justification would be helpful.
• The language regarding 'Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government' might be considered politically charged or subjective, warranting further clarification on how it aligns with practical transportation management objectives.
• The document lacks detailed information on the specific changes that were made in FMR Case 2024-03 and how reverting these will impact transportation management practices.
• There is no mention of stakeholder consultation or feedback in the decision-making process regarding this rescission, which could be important for transparency and inclusion.
• The address section uses formatting that makes it challenging to discern the exact URL due to misplaced line breaks.
• The document does not outline any financial implications or potential cost savings associated with rescinding the regulation, which would be pertinent to assess the decision's impact on wasteful spending.