Independent Agency Rules — Week of Oct 20, 2025

This week, two notable government actions prompted questions about federal agencies that are designed to make decisions based on science and law rather than political direction. First, thirty Democratic senators filed a formal petition to force a vote on disapproving an HHS rule called "Policy on Adhering to the Text of the Administrative Procedure Act" (MEASURES DISCHARGED PETITION). Second, the President signed an executive order (Ensuring Continued Accountability in Federal Hiring) requiring all federal agencies to route hiring decisions through politically appointed committees that ensure new hires align with "the priorities of my Administration."

This might matter because the Administrative Procedure Act is the basic law that ensures federal agencies write rules through open, transparent processes rather than political dictation. A fight over how agencies interpret that law could affect whether agencies like the FDA or EPA retain the flexibility they need to develop science-based regulations. Meanwhile, requiring that career government hiring align with presidential priorities — even at agencies designed to be independent — could gradually shift who works at these agencies and what expertise they bring.

There are important alternative explanations to consider. The most likely is that the HHS rule is a straightforward effort to ensure agencies follow the law as written — a reasonable goal — and the Senate petition reflects routine partisan disagreement about deregulation rather than evidence of institutional harm. More broadly, both actions may be part of a genuine effort by the administration to improve government efficiency and accountability, objectives that do not necessarily erode agency independence. The hiring order also includes exceptions for independent agencies and may be primarily aimed at controlling costs and improving workforce management after significant restructuring.

Still, the combination of an executive branch rule that may constrain how agencies conduct rulemaking, paired with centralized political involvement in who agencies can hire, creates overlapping dynamics worth watching — even as the stated goals of efficiency and legal fidelity are acknowledged.

Limitations: This analysis is based on AI review of public documents and cannot determine how these policies will be implemented in practice. The small number of documents reviewed this week (16) means individual items have outsized influence on the assessment.