Count the Crimes to Cut Act
HB2159, the "Count the Crimes to Cut Act," directs the Attorney General to prepare a comprehensive report on federal criminal offenses within one year of enactment. The report must list all federal criminal statutory offenses, identify the elements of each offense, and provide the potential penalty, the number of Department of Justice prosecutions over the prior 15 years, and the mens rea requirement for each offense.
The bill also requires the heads of a broad set of federal agencies to report on criminal regulatory offenses enforceable by those agencies. For each such offense, the agencies must identify the offense, the potential criminal penalty, the number of referrals for prosecution over the prior 15 years, and the mens rea requirement. Covered agencies include major departments such as Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, HHS, Homeland Security, Labor, Treasury, EPA, SEC, FTC, FCC, OSHA-related bodies, and several others. Within two years, the Attorney General and each covered agency must create publicly accessible online indexes of the offenses identified in their reports. The bill states that it does not authorize or require appropriations.
If enacted, the bill would not itself change substantive criminal law or create new offenses; instead, it would impose reporting and transparency obligations on the Department of Justice and numerous federal agencies. It would require the federal government to compile, standardize, and publish information about criminal statutes and regulatory offenses, including penalties, prosecution history, and mens rea requirements, and to make that information freely available online. The practical effect would be to increase visibility into the scope of federal criminal law and regulatory enforcement across multiple statutes and agencies.
The available legislative record shows no recorded votes or committee debate, and the bill was reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee without amendment. That procedural history suggests the measure advanced in a relatively noncontroversial or at least unopposed committee posture. Based on the text alone, the bill appears framed as a transparency and accountability measure rather than a policy change, which may have made it more broadly acceptable to lawmakers concerned about overcriminalization and the complexity of federal offenses.
The main point of potential contention is the bill’s scope and administrative burden. It requires a large number of agencies to inventory criminal regulatory offenses and compile 15 years of prosecution or referral data, which could be resource-intensive and difficult to standardize. Another possible issue is the breadth of the agencies covered, including independent commissions and enforcement bodies that may have differing recordkeeping practices. Supporters are likely to emphasize transparency, while skeptics may question whether the reporting mandate is necessary or whether it could divert agency resources without directly reforming the underlying criminal code.