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... disturbing.

Be sure to check out the latest issue of our biweekly newsletter, The Watcher. Reg policy articles this time: Return of the Senior Death Discount?: Heinzerling v. Mannix

Agencies released their Spring 2006 regulatory agendas on Monday, April 24. To get the low-down on the agencies’ plans for the coming six months and what they accomplished in the last six month period, go to the Federal Register.

Law professor and CPR member scholar Amy Sinden has a provocative new article takes down the arguments for market-based and privatization solutions to the tragedy of the commons: [A]s academics and policymakers clamor to distance themselves from the now dowdy and stilted fashions of 1970s-style “command-and-control regulation” and to embrace the virtues of the free market, privatization has replaced government intervention as the preferred solution to the tragedy of the commons. Right wing ideologues pump out books, articles, and monographs touting the virtues of “free-market