Jan 11, 2007 by Matthew Madia
This morning, the National Academy of Sciences rejected the White House Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Proposed Risk Assessment Bulletin. OMB charged NAS with the task of peer-reviewing the bulletin, and NAS issued a stinging rebuke.
The Bulletin calls for an overly standardized method across all agencies of assessing the potential risks of regulatory action. No matter if the issue is the environment, consumer products, or massive buildings and infrastructure, the framework would be the same.read in full
Dec 11, 2006 by Guest Blogger
Agencies released today the Fall 2006 Unified Agenda and Regulatory Plan, which sums up the work of the last six months and sets priorities for the coming year. Unfortunately, this year's regulatory plan has a few too many familiar faces. Agencies have failed to make progress on important regulations such as reducing worker's exposure to crystalline silica or upgrading energy efficiency standards. What's even more troubling about the Bush's regulatory plan for 2007 is the return of some industry favorites that aim to rollback health, safety and environmental standards.read in full
Sep 25, 2006 by Guest Blogger
A California judge overturned a 2005 regulation that would have allowed state governors to petition the Forest Service to develop land protected under the Clinton-era roadless rule. The Clinton rule sought to protect 60 million acres of national forests from development. But the Bush administration has repeatedly attempted to undermine the regulations.
Now, U.S.read in full
Sep 11, 2006 by Guest Blogger
According to documents obtained by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, the Bush administration has waived whistleblower protections under the Clean Air Act and the Solid Waste Disposal Act. Acting Assistant Attorney General Steve Bradbury wrote a memo in 2005 detailing why whistleblower protections do not apply under the acts.read in full
Aug 18, 2006 by Guest Blogger
The White House's annual draft "regulatory accounting" report once again fails to correct enormous errors that have been pointed out repeatedly over the years. There has been a very nice improvement: finally, many of the cost-benefit analyses used in the report are identified and in some cases linked to.read in full
Aug 7, 2006 by Guest Blogger
Be sure to check out Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal on the Dudley nomination. DeLong supports the role of cost-benefit analysis in regulatory decisionmaking, but he is nonetheless not a kindred spirit of Dudley:
I had always thought that the benefit-cost ratio from flame-retardant pajamas was high. The fact that Susan Dudley sees this as an example of government overreach.... As someone who believes in getting the benefit-cost analysis right, I find this...read in full