OMB Annual Report Shows Regulations' Benefits Exceed Costs

On June 24, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released its annual report on the costs and benefits of major federal regulations (those with an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy) reviewed by OMB over the last ten years. OMB issued the 2011 Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates on State, Local, and Tribal Entities in compliance with the Regulatory-Right-to-Know Act, which requires OMB to submit to Congress an annual report on the costs and benefits of federal regulations for the previous year.

read in full

EPA Withdraws TRI Clarification Rule That Would Protect Public Health

Last Friday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew from consideration a final rule that clarified exemptions to its Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting requirement. The articles exemption clarification was being reviewed by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), the last step before it could be finalized and published in the Federal Register. The OIRA review process is not made available to the public, so it is impossible to tell what caused EPA to pull the rule.

read in full

OIRA Administrator Sunstein Calls Crain & Crain Report "Deeply Flawed"

In his oral testimony in a hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on June 23, Cass Sunstein called out a "deeply flawed" report that many have been using to criticize the costs of the regulatory system.

read in full

"A Nation Without Regulations Would be a Nation at Risk"

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), chair of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, opened a committee hearing on regulation with the quote above. His committee was conducting a hearing today entitled Federal Regulation: A Review of Legislative Proposals.

read in full

Real Stories about the Benefits of Regulation Emerge Ahead of Senate Hearing

For months, the country has been bombarded with increasingly negative and misleading messages about federal regulation, and Congress has responded by launching attacks against public protections that safeguard our air, our water, our food, our workplaces, and our economy. What's been missing from these anti-regulatory broadsides are examples of the benefits of regulation, but such stories emerged earlier today during a Coalition for Sensible Safeguards press call.

read in full

New FDA Report Illustrates How Spending Cuts Threaten Food Safety

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a report yesterday recognizing the challenges in regulating imported products. The report acknowledges that the agency does not have "the resources to adequately keep pace with the pressures of globalization."

read in full

Spending Bill Would Hide Consumer Safety Risks, Money in Politics

Consumer product safety risks would be concealed and influence peddling in government contracting would remain out of public view under the provisions of the fiscal year (FY) 2012 spending bill approved today by the House Financial Services and General Government appropriations subcommittee.

read in full

EPA Air Toxics Rule Will Spur Job Growth

The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed rule to limit toxic chemical emissions from power plants will create between 28,000 and 158,000 jobs in the next four years, according to a new study by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI).

read in full

Snowe Anti-Reg Amendment Fails, but with a Majority

A legislative amendment intended to delay new public protections and roll back existing regulations failed in the Senate today. The amendment, championed by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), is the same legislation that derailed a small business aid bill last month.

read in full

FDA Chides House Republican’s “Body Count” Amendment

An amendment introduced by Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT) would hogtie the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by forcing the agency to wait for public health crises to happen before it could act. "This amendment would require that consumers actually be harmed before FDA can take certain actions to protect the public health,” the agency said.

read in full

Pages

Subscribe to The Fine Print: blog posts from Center for Effective Government