- ManufacturersReduces immediate compliance costs for rubber tire manufacturers by eliminating NESHAP obligations.
- StatesLowers regulatory paperwork and reporting burdens on affected facilities and state agencies.
- Targeted stakeholdersPotentially preserves manufacturing jobs by avoiding rule-induced cost increases for some firms.
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing".
Became Public Law No: 119-14.
This joint resolution uses the Congressional Review Act (chapter 8, title 5) to disapprove and nullify the EPA rule titled “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing” (89 Fed.
Reg. 94886, Nov. 29, 2024).
The resolution states the rule shall have no force or effect.
Narrow scope helps House prospects; Senate procedural hurdles and executive response create substantial uncertainty.
How solid the drafting looks.
Progressives emphasize health and emissions impacts; conservatives emphasize regulatory burden.
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
- Targeted stakeholdersEliminates anticipated emissions controls, likely increasing hazardous air pollutant releases from facilities.
- Local governmentsMay worsen local air quality and associated public health outcomes in nearby communities.
- Targeted stakeholdersShifts potential health and environmental costs onto communities and public budgets.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Progressives emphasize health and emissions impacts; conservatives emphasize regulatory burden.
Likely views the resolution as a rollback of public health and environmental protections for communities and workers near tire manufacturing plants.
Sees it as favoring industry cost-savings over pollution controls and a dangerous precedent weakening EPA authority.
Approaches the resolution pragmatically, seeking evidence of costs and benefits.
Worries about both regulatory overreach and removing meaningful pollution controls without replacement or analysis.
Likely supports the resolution as constraining EPA regulatory overreach and protecting domestic manufacturers from burdensome rules.
Views disapproval as promoting economic competitiveness and limiting costly mandates.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Narrow scope helps House prospects; Senate procedural hurdles and executive response create substantial uncertainty.
- Absent formal cost or regulatory impact estimates
- Administration/executive branch position unknown from text
Recent votes on the bill.
Joint Resolution Passed (55-45)
On the Joint Resolution H.J.Res. 61
Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-43)
On the Motion to Proceed H.J.Res. 61
Passed
On Passage
Go deeper than the headline read.
Progressives emphasize health and emissions impacts; conservatives emphasize regulatory burden.
Narrow scope helps House prospects; Senate procedural hurdles and executive response create substantial uncertainty.
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of tit…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.