Attacks on Clean Air Standards Now Target the Expected Health Benefits of Rules

Clean air protections are under attack yet again. While opponents of these standards continue to target rules through anti-regulatory legislation, new arguments criticizing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) analyses of air pollution reduction benefits have emerged. These efforts to undermine clean air standards ignore the purpose and legal mandate of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by focusing on the costs to businesses instead of the health benefits of cleaner air, despite evidence that the benefits of these rules outweigh their costs.

read in full

Can We Employ Evidence in the Battle over Regulations?

The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) recently asked for comments on whether and how to consider if regulations under development in federal agencies could have "adverse effects" on employment. Once again, the rhetoric coming from OIRA is reinforcing the distortions of industry groups, even while evidence shows that regulations are good for the American people and the economy.

read in full

Momentum Builds for Legislation to Curb Use of Toxic Flame Retardants

Lawmakers are calling for legislation to protect children from toxic flame retardant chemicals embedded in a host of everyday consumer products. The substances have been linked to cancer, endocrine disruption, and other serious illnesses. Since these chemicals are widely used in furniture, clothes, and carpets, practically every home in the country could be affected.

read in full

Workplace Safety and Randomized Controlled Trials: Another Weapon of Delay?

A fundamental principle of modern workplace safety laws holds that if scientific evidence suggests the health and safety of the public is at risk, the federal government should step in and take action, even if no conclusive proof has yet been generated. The principle is that the government should adopt public protections based on the “best available evidence” rather than wait indefinitely for “proof” of a hazard while workers suffer harm.

read in full

Why Is the Small Business Administration Arguing that Formaldehyde Doesn’t Cause Cancer?

The Small Business Administration (SBA) is supposed to protect the interests of small businesses – businesses most Americans define as employing fewer than 100 workers. But a little-known office in the SBA, the Office of Advocacy, has recently weighed in with the National Toxicology Program (NTP), urging that it scrap a congressionally mandated Report on Carcinogens and challenging NTP’s designation of formaldehyde as a known human carcinogen. The NTP report is not a regulatory document. It does not directly affect small business costs. So what is the Office of Advocacy at the SBA doing objecting to a scientific report on carcinogens?

read in full

Controversy Mounts over EPA’s Release of Draft Report on Fracking

On May 3, the Associated Press reported that the governor of Wyoming pressured the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to delay the release of a draft study linking a controversial natural gas extraction process, commonly referred to as fracking, to the contamination of drinking water. Wyoming officials apparently used the delay to coordinate efforts with the oil and gas industries to attack the report’s findings.

read in full

Big Business Suing to Stop Notices Informing Workers of Their Right to Organize

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other industry representatives are blocking a new rule that would better inform workers of their legal rights. The rule, issued by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in August 2011, would inform employees of their right to organize and bargain collectively. The rule would add to the existing framework of policies to protect workers' right to know, but business lawsuits are preventing it from taking effect.

read in full

Pages