House Bill 2402 directs every Oregon state agency to review its administrative rules and amend them by January 1, 2027, with the goal of simplifying the rules and eliminating redundancy. The bill applies both to duplication within an agency’s own rules and overlap between that agency’s rules and those of other agencies.
The measure is temporary: the new statutory sections are repealed on January 2, 2027, shortly after the review deadline. In practical terms, the bill creates a one-time statewide rule-cleanup mandate rather than a permanent ongoing program, and it is placed in ORS chapter 183, which governs administrative procedures.
Impact
HB 2402 would add a short-term requirement to Oregon’s administrative procedure laws, compelling all agencies to conduct a comprehensive review of their rules and revise them for clarity and redundancy reduction. It does not change substantive program eligibility or benefits directly, but it could affect how agencies draft, organize, and enforce regulations across state government. The bill would likely influence agencies, regulated parties, and the public by making rules easier to navigate and potentially reducing conflicting or duplicative regulatory language.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no recorded debate or formal vote history to gauge support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to reflect a generally reform-oriented, administrative-efficiency approach that is likely to be viewed favorably by those seeking simpler regulations and less bureaucratic duplication. Because the measure is limited to rule review and simplification, it does not present obvious policy tradeoffs in the bill text itself.
Contention
The bill text does not identify any specific points of contention, and there are no transcripts or votes showing disagreement. Potential concerns, if raised in discussion, would likely center on the administrative burden of reviewing all agency rules by a fixed deadline, the resources needed to complete the work, and whether simplification efforts could inadvertently remove useful detail or create inconsistencies during the revision process. Any opposition would most likely come from agencies or stakeholders worried about implementation costs or unintended regulatory changes.