HR 6329 — Congress 119
Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025
Official source: https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6329
Congress.gov subjects: Administrative law and regulatory procedures; Government information and archives; Office of Management and Budget (OMB); Government Operations and Politics
Issues impacted: Regulation & Agency Oversight (ai, high)
Official bill text (stored)
Plain-text extraction from Congress.gov text formats. Canonical source remains the official URL above. Full text is prioritized for bills with roll-call votes.
119 HR 6329 IH: Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025 U.S. House of Representatives 2025-12-01 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain. I 119th CONGRESS 1st Session H. R. 6329 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES December 1, 2025 Mrs. McClain introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform , and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary , for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To ensure that Federal agencies rely on the best reasonably available scientific, technical, demographic, economic, and statistical information and evidence to develop, issue or inform the public of the nature and bases of Federal agency rules and guidance, and for other purposes. 1. Short title This Act may be cited as the Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025 . 2. Information quality assurance (a) In general Subchapter I of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: 3522 Information quality assurance (a) In general Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of the Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025, the Director shall— (1) update the guidelines issued under the Information Quality Act— (A) to provide policy and procedural guidance to the heads of Federal agencies for better ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of influential information or evidence— (i) used by the heads of Federal agencies to develop or issue rules and guidance made available to the public; or (ii) disseminated to the public to inform the public about the nature and bases of such rules and guidance; and (B) in a manner consistent with— (i) this chapter; and (ii) the amendments made by the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 ( Public Law 115–435 ; 132 Stat. 5529); and (2) make the guidelines updated under paragraph (1) available on the website of the Office of Management and Budget. (b) Content of guidelines Not later than 1 year after the Director updates the guidelines under subsection (a), the head of each Federal agency to which the guidelines apply shall— (1) update any guidelines issued by the head of the Federal agency under the Information Quality Act to ensure that, in the case of influential information or evidence, the best reasonably available information and evidence that is fit-for-purpose is relied on in developing, issuing, or informing the public about the rules and guidance of the Federal agency; (2) publish the guidelines updated by the head of the Federal agency under paragraph (1) on the website of the Federal agency; (3) ensure the administrative mechanisms established under subparagraph (B) of subsection (b)(2) of the Information Quality Act are made available, as applicable, with respect to seeking and obtaining the correction of any influential information or evidence disseminated by agencies that the Federal agency uses to develop or issue a rule or guidance made available to the public, or to inform the public of the nature and basis of any rule or guidance of the Federal agency, that does not comply with the guidelines issued under paragraph (1); and (4) include in the report required under subparagraph (C) of subsection (b)(2) of the Information Quality Act the information described under that subparagraph with respect to any complaints received by the Federal agency related to the accuracy of influential information or evidence the Federal agency uses to develop, issue, or inform the public of the nature and bases of rules or guidance. (c) Public disclosure (1) Availability (A) In general Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this section, the Director shall issue guidance, which may be included in the guidelines updated under subsection (a), that directs the head of the Federal agency to make available, except as provided under paragraph (2), in the docket for the rulemaking of any rule of the Federal agency, or in the public administrative record for any guidance— (i) the critical factual material upon which the head of the Federal agency relied as part of the rulemaking or guidance development process; and (ii) a citation to any other source used to inform the rulemaking or guidance development process, including a citation to any public comment that is referenced in a final rulemaking action. (B) Process (i) In general Except as provided under clause (ii), the guidance required under subparagraph (A) shall direct an agency to make available the information that must be made available under that subparagraph as soon as reasonably possible before, but at a minimum at, the time that the Federal agency promulgates a rule or issues guidance. (ii) Notice and comment If a Federal agency engages in notice and comment rulemaking under section 553 of title 5 or provides for public notice and an opportunity to comment on proposed guidance, the guidance required under subparagraph (A) shall direct the Federal agency to provide notice and an opportunity to comment on the critical factual material upon which the head of the Federal agency relied. (C) Revisions If the critical factual material under subparagraph (A)(i) is revised in a manner that may materially affect the rulemaking or guidance after the public is given notice and an opportunity to comment pursuant to subparagraph (B)(ii), but before the rule or guidance is published, the head of the Federal agency shall make the revision available in the docket for the rulemaking or in the applicable administrative record for the guidance in a timely manner. (2) Implementation of public disclosure requirement exceptions (A) In general The guidance under paragraph (1) shall direct the head of the Federal agency— (i) to implement paragraph (1) consistent with this chapter, sections 552 and 552a of title 5, and any rights under titles 17 and 35; (ii) to implement paragraph (1) to the maximum extent feasible, considering costs to the Federal Government; and (iii) in implementing paragraph (1), to not make available in the docket for the rulemaking of any rule of the Federal agency, or in the public administrative record for any guidance, as applicable, information that is prohibited from being disclosed to the public under any statute. (B) Explanation to be included in docket or administrative record If the head of the Federal agency does not make critical factual material available under paragraph (1), subject to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the head of the Federal agency shall include in the docket for the rulemaking or the public administrative record, if applicable, for the guidance— (i) an explanation as to why such information cannot be made publicly available; and (ii) a description of any steps being taken to increase access to such information, even if the information cannot be made public. (3) Format of critical factual material (A) In general Subject to paragraph (2) and subparagraph (B), the head of each Federal agency shall make available any critical factual material required to be made available under paragraph (1)(A) as an open Government data asset. (B) Exception If an exception under paragraph (2)(A) applies, the head of a Federal agency may— (i) maximize public access to the critical factual material to the extent permitted by law; (ii) make the critical factual material available by citation or description; and (iii) place in the docket for the rulemaking or the administrative record for the guidance a specification of the identity of the entity that holds a legal right to prohibit or limit reproduction, distribution, or public display of the information and the means by which a member of the public may request to obtain a full copy of the information from such holder. (d) Definitions In this section: (1) Evidence The term evidence has the meaning given that term in section 3561. (2) Influential information or evidence The term influential information or evidence means information or evidence about which an agency can reasonably determine that reliance on or dissemination of the information will have or does have a clear and substantial impact on important public actions, policies or statements or on important private sector decisions. (3) Information Quality Act The term Information Quality Act means section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 ( Public Law 106–554 ). . (b) Table of sections The table of sections for subchapter I of chapter 35 of title 44, United States Code, is amended by adding after the item relating to section 3521 the following: 3522. Information Quality Assurance. . (c) No additional funds No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of carrying out this Act or the amendments made by this Act.
Plain-English summary
Confidence: high · Complexity: moderate · Model: grok-4.5
This bill is about making sure federal agencies use solid facts when they write rules and guidance that affect the public.
Within a year of it becoming law, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB—the White House office that sets management rules for agencies) would update older Information Quality Act guidelines. Those updates would push agencies to maximize the quality, objectivity, usefulness, and integrity of “influential” information—the kind that clearly shapes big public policies or private-sector choices. The updates also have to line up with existing evidence-based policymaking law, and OMB would post them online.
Then each agency would get another year to update its own guidelines. For that influential stuff, agencies would have to rely on the best information that’s reasonably available and actually fits the job. They’d post their guidelines, keep open the usual ways for people to ask for corrections when something’s off, and report those accuracy complaints like they already do under the older law.
Agencies would also have to put the key facts they leaned on—and citations to other sources—into the public rulemaking docket or guidance record, ideally as open government data. They’d do this as soon as they reasonably can, and give the public a chance to comment on that material when there’s a normal notice-and-comment process. If they can’t release something because of privacy, copyright, other laws, or cost, they still have to explain why and what they’re doing to improve access. The bill doesn’t authorize any new money to do all this.
Related issues
How a vote maps to positions
Impartial mapping: which issue position a Yea vs Nay advances. When a bill has multiple floor votes, each roll can have its own mapping. Bill-level entries (no roll listed) apply as a default when a roll has no specific map. Used for legislator alignment.
All rolls (bill default)
| Issue | Yea advances | Nay advances | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Regulation & Agency Oversight | Process, transparency, and reporting | Limit new reporting and disclosure mandates | A yea vote would require OMB and agencies to update Information Quality Act guidelines and to disclose critical factual material used in rules and guidance, which matches process, transparency, and reporting-focused regulatory oversight rather than CRA nullification or broad deregulation. No catalog position clearly describes a vote against these information-quality and disclosure requirements. |