Yesterday, two House subcommittees held back-to-back oversight hearings investigating President Bush's recent amendments to Executive Order 12866 — Regulatory Planning and Review. The first hearing, held by the House Science and Technology Committee subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, delved into the specific impacts of the amendments.

• OMB Watch's own Rick Melberth framed the amendments as the next step in a disturbing trend where the White House has adopted tools to delay regulation.
• Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA) wondered how the marketplace incentivized certain protections.
• Witness and former OIRA administrator Sally Katzen criticized the administration for exerting influence over agency guidance documents.
• And subcommittee Chair Brad Miller (D-NC) chastised the influence of the Presidential appointees who will serve as Regulatory Policy Officers:

If an RPO makes the wrong decision for the wrong reason, we're not going to know about it. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the ranking member on the subcommittee, exhibited a lack of understanding of the issue at large. He claimed the amendments do not require "additional hurdles to be overcome" and he muddled the separate issues of market failures and cost-benefit analyses. He left abruptly in the middle of the hearing. The second hearing, held by the House Judiciary Committee subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, focused on action Congress could take. Committee Chair John Conyers (D-MI) and subcommittee Chair Linda Sanchez (D-CA) both asked witnesses what Congress could do. While Columbia University law professor Peter Strauss admitted Congress's options are limited, Curtis Copeland from the Congressional Research Service pointed out that Congress may declare that Executive Orders not hold any legal sway. Rep. William Delahunt (D-MA) is ready to "wage war" on the "institutional combat" against the legislative branch. Read more from The Pump Handle here.

On Feb. 13, the House will hold a joint subcommittee hearing titled, "Amending Executive Order 12866: Good Governance or Regulatory Usurpation?" The hearing will include testimony by former OIRA administrator Sally Katzen, Georgetown law professor David Vladeck, and OMB Watch's own Rick Melberth. On Jan. 18, President Bush issued a slew of amendments to Executive Order 12866 — Regulatory Planning and Review. The amendments vary in their specific impact, but share the goal of slowing the regulatory process. On Jan. 30, The New York Times published a front page story on the amendments, pushing the issue into the national spotlight. Now, the House Science and Technology Committee Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight and the House Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law (say that three times fast) will hold a joint hearing to investigate. It is heartening to see Congress exercise its oversight power. Bush's decision to amend the regulatory process undermines our nation's public health and safety protections. Furthermore, it shifts certain Congressional powers into the White House, and shows Mr. Bush's contempt for the people's branch of government. Let's hope the White House is paying attention this Tuesday.

Yesterday, a reporter asked White House Press Secretary Tony Snow about President Bush’s amendments to the regulatory process. In his response, Snow reached new heights of evasiveness. Instead of just admitting the White House dislikes regulations because they are perceived to be a burden to industry, Snow talked about how much they love the environment. Speaking of climate change: But no administration in American history, and none on the face of the Earth, has been more aggressive in trying to do sound science on this than this administration. Considering the administration was recently found to be manipulating climate science, it is hard to believe Snow said this with a straight face. Is it too late to nominate Tony Snow for an Oscar?