The Missouri House's version of a Regulatory Sandbox program is ready for a final vote before being sent on to the Senate.
The proposal would create a Regulatory Relief Office with the Department of Economic Development tasked with identifying state laws and regulations that could be waived for certain businesses for a two-year period. Businesses could apply with the office for a series of exemptions they would like to benefit from, which would be approved or denied by the office.
The office would be advised and could be countered by an advisory committee made up of executive and legislative appointees, lawmakers and the heads of the Commerce and Insurance and Economic Development departments.
Waived rules would create an open "sandbox" for businesses to operate in without typical regulatory burdens to see how they might fare.
Businesses eligible for the sandbox program would be those that use new or emerging technology or ideas for their products, production or services and have a physical presence in the state.
Rep. Alex Riley, a Republican representing part of Springfield, sponsored the proposal again this legislative session as House Bill 268.
"The impetus behind this bill is the extremely high regulatory burden that is imposed on the people in our state, specifically our small businesses," Riley said on the House floor. "I think there are a few benefits to this legislation. One of them obviously, is that it sends a clear message across the country that Missouri is open for business, we are open for innovation, we are doing cool, new, innovative things. We would be the third state in the country, should we adopt this legislation, that would have a regulatory sandbox that's open across all industries."
While Regulatory Sandboxes have become more prominent in the U.S., only Utah and Arizona currently extend the program to all industries, while other states have tailored their programs to specific sectors like financial technology or insurance.
Riley noted the bill had made progress last year with bipartisan support and that he has continued to take feedback from both parties as the bill makes its way through the legislative process. A single amendment was proposed for the floor debate Wednesday by Jackson County Democrat Rep. Jerome Barnes would have inserted additional environmental protections by requiring them to be taken into consideration by the office.
"There's no doubt that the gentleman has worked diligently and hard with this committee, and he has a bill that could be made better by this amendment," Barnes said. "There's nothing wrong with trying to protect this environment because we live in it every day, our kids live in it. So I think the more protection we have, well, you just can't have enough protection."
Barnes said the amendment was language from the Sierra Club, an environmental group that opposed the bill in committee.
Other members of his side of the aisle supported Barnes's amendment, though Riley and other Republicans asserted there were already enough protections in place through the underlying bill. The amendment was rejected and the bill was perfected, setting it up for a last House vote before it moves on to the upper chamber.
Another Democrat, Rep. Michael Burton from St. Louis County, warned the original programs in other states were only five years old -- not long enough, he said, to determine if they were a benefit or detriment.
"We're taking their idea from Utah, that was supposed to be about technology, and we're bringing it to Missouri, and morphing it into this crazy thing," he said. "If we knowingly deregulate things that end up causing people harm, and we know that because we're deregulating them, and there's a good chance that people could get very sick and possibly die, could the state of Missouri be held responsible?"
The bill went through changes in the Economic Development Committee before passing earlier this month, including the elimination of gubernatorial appointments to the committee and an extension of the timeline for applications to be approved.
The Senate passed its own version of the proposal earlier this month and will begin its progress through the House in the same committee.