In a bold and swift legislative maneuver, the Republican-led House of Representatives has voted to nullify several late-stage regulations from President Joe Biden’s administration, marking a significant rollback just as his term draws to a close. The vote, leveraging the powerful Congressional Review Act (CRA), targeted rules on environmental protections and labor standards, igniting fierce partisan debate on Capitol Hill.
The action unfolded on December 20, 2024, during the lame-duck session of Congress, with Republicans capitalizing on their slim majority to advance what they describe as a correction to overreaching federal mandates. The resolutions passed the House by narrow margins, reflecting deep divisions but underscoring the GOP’s determination to reshape the regulatory landscape before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025.
Republicans Invoke CRA to Dismantle Biden’s Environmental Safeguards
The Congressional Review Act, a 1996 law designed to allow Congress to overturn recent agency rules, became the weapon of choice for House Republicans. Under the CRA, resolutions of disapproval can be introduced within 60 legislative days of a rule’s finalization, and if passed by both chambers and not vetoed by the president, they carry the force of law without needing presidential signature in certain cases.
One of the primary targets was the Biden administration’s methane emissions rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Finalized in November 2024, this regulation aimed to curb methane leaks from oil and gas operations, a potent greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. The EPA estimated the rule could prevent 300,000 tons of methane emissions annually by 2035, saving up to $1.2 billion in climate-related damages. Republicans, led by House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, argued that the rule would impose crippling costs on energy producers at a time when domestic production is vital for national security.
“This regulation is nothing more than a parting shot from an administration hostile to American energy independence,” McMorris Rodgers declared during floor debate. “We’re not going to let bureaucratic overreach jeopardize jobs in states like Texas and Pennsylvania.”
Another environmental regulation in the crosshairs was the Department of the Interior’s update to stream protection rules for coal mining. Issued in late October 2024, it sought to restore safeguards eroded during the Trump era, requiring mining companies to prevent acid mine drainage and sedimentation in waterways. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, hailed it as a victory for Appalachian communities, but industry lobbyists decried it as anti-coal bias. The House resolution passed 220-210, with all Democrats voting against it.
These moves are part of a broader Republican strategy to unwind Biden’s climate agenda, which included over 100 major environmental rules during his term. According to a report from the Brookings Institution, the Biden administration issued more than $500 billion in regulatory actions across sectors, with environmental rules comprising a significant portion. House Republicans, fresh off their electoral gains, see this as an opportunity to deliver quick wins for their base, particularly in fossil fuel-dependent districts.
Labor Regulations Face GOP Scrutiny: Gig Economy and Union Rights in the Spotlight
Beyond the environment, House Republicans turned their attention to labor policies, zeroing in on regulations that expanded worker protections under the Biden Department of Labor. A key target was the updated joint employer rule from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), finalized in August 2024. This rule broadened the definition of a “joint employer,” making large corporations potentially liable for labor violations by franchisees or contractors—think Amazon facing accountability for delivery drivers or McDonald’s for franchise store wages.
The NLRB projected the rule would benefit up to 1.2 million workers by facilitating union organizing and fair wage claims. However, business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lobbied aggressively against it, warning of increased litigation and operational costs that could stifle small businesses. “This is regulatory creep at its worst,” said Chamber President Suzanne Clark in a statement supporting the House resolution. The vote to disapprove passed 219-211, highlighting the razor-thin margins in the current House.
Another labor regulation under fire was the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) heat stress standard, proposed but finalized in provisional form in December 2024. It would require employers to provide water, rest breaks, and acclimatization training in extreme heat conditions, addressing a growing hazard amid climate change. The rule stemmed from Biden’s executive order on workplace safety and could impact millions of outdoor workers in agriculture, construction, and warehousing. Republicans countered that it represented federal micromanagement, with Rep. Virginia Foxx, chair of the House Education and Workforce Committee, calling it “an unnecessary burden on employers already navigating inflation.”
These labor rollbacks align with Republican priorities to favor business flexibility, especially as incoming President Trump has vowed to slash regulations by 10 for every new one issued. Data from the Economic Policy Institute shows that Biden’s labor rules helped narrow wage gaps for low-income workers, with median wages rising 4.5% in protected sectors. Yet, in the polarized Congress, such gains were portrayed by GOP members as threats to economic growth.
Democrats Decry Partisan Overreach as Bipartisan Cracks Emerge
The House votes drew immediate condemnation from Democrats, who branded the actions a blatant partisan power grab in the waning days of the 118th Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries took to the floor, accusing Republicans of undermining democratic processes. “This lame-duck blitz is not governance; it’s vengeance,” Jeffries said. “President Biden’s regulations protect working families and our planet—these resolutions serve only special interests.”
Senate Democrats, anticipating the resolutions’ arrival in the upper chamber, prepared to mount a defense. Sen. Chuck Schumer, the outgoing majority leader, warned that the moves could face filibuster hurdles, requiring 60 votes to advance in the current Senate. However, with Republicans set to gain control in January, the dynamics could shift dramatically.
Not all reactions were strictly partisan. A handful of moderate Republicans, including Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, expressed reservations about the environmental rollbacks, citing the need for balanced climate action. Environmental advocates mobilized quickly, with the Natural Resources Defense Council launching a petition that garnered 50,000 signatures within hours of the vote. Labor unions like the AFL-CIO rallied supporters, emphasizing the human cost: “These rules aren’t abstract—they save lives and secure futures,” said AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler.
Public opinion polls reflect the divide. A Pew Research Center survey from November 2024 showed 62% of Americans support stronger environmental regulations, while only 38% favor deregulation for business growth. On labor issues, Gallup data indicated 55% approval for Biden’s worker protections. Yet, in Republican strongholds, support for the overrides runs high, with 70% of GOP voters viewing the regulations as excessive, per a Fox News poll.
The controversy also spotlighted the CRA’s history of use. Enacted after the 1994 Republican Revolution, it has been invoked 20 times successfully, mostly against Democratic administrations. The Obama era saw 15 resolutions pass, including the repeal of a broadband privacy rule. Under Trump, Democrats used it once against a Planned Parenthood defunding measure. Now, with Biden’s term ending, Republicans aim to maximize its impact, potentially teeing up 20-30 more resolutions in the coming weeks.
Path Forward: Senate Battles and Trump’s Regulatory Overhaul Loom
As the resolutions head to the Senate, their fate hangs in the balance. The current Democratic majority could block them via filibuster, but time is short—only a few legislative days remain before the 119th Congress convenes on January 3, 2025. If passed before then, President Biden could veto them, though Republicans might override with a two-thirds majority, an unlikely prospect given the numbers.
Post-inauguration, the landscape shifts. The new Republican Senate, combined with Trump’s executive authority, could revive these efforts through alternative means, such as agency reinterpretations or new legislation. Trump’s transition team has already signaled plans for a “regulatory freeze,” echoing his first-term actions that rolled back over 20,000 pages of federal rules.
Looking ahead, this lame-duck blitz sets the stage for a contentious regulatory war. Environmental experts warn that overturning methane rules could exacerbate global warming, with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimating methane’s role in 30% of recent temperature rises. On labor, advocates fear a return to pre-Biden vulnerabilities, potentially increasing workplace injuries—OSHA reported 5,486 fatalities in 2023, many preventable with stronger standards.
Stakeholders on all sides are bracing for impact. Oil and gas companies, represented by the American Petroleum Institute, praised the House action as a “victory for energy reality,” projecting $10 billion in annual savings. Conversely, green energy firms like NextEra Energy expressed disappointment, noting that stable regulations are crucial for investment in renewables, which created 3.2 million jobs under Biden.
In the broader context of Congress, this episode underscores the high-stakes nature of lame-duck sessions. Historically, such periods have produced pivotal changes, from the 2010 tax cut extensions to 2022’s omnibus spending bill. For Biden’s legacy, these overrides represent a bitter coda, chipping away at achievements like the Inflation Reduction Act’s clean energy incentives.
As Washington transitions, the implications ripple nationwide. Rural communities reliant on coal may see short-term relief, while urban workers and climate-vulnerable regions face long-term risks. Analysts from the Heritage Foundation predict a 15-20% reduction in federal regulatory burden under Trump, boosting GDP by 1.2% over four years. Critics from the Center for American Progress counter that such cuts could cost $200 billion in health and environmental benefits.
The House’s actions today are more than procedural—they signal a philosophical pivot in governance, prioritizing deregulation amid economic anxieties. Whether the Senate sustains or stalls these efforts will shape the first 100 days of the Trump era, influencing everything from energy prices to workers’ rights in an increasingly polarized nation.
