A Senate committee recently announced a hearing for Nov. 13 to consider the nomination of Susan Dudley to be the head of the White House's regulatory office. The Dudley nomination has created a firestorm of protest from organizations representing workers, environmental issues, consumer protections, and other public interest concerns.

The Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs has scheduled a hearing on the Dudley nomination to the post of administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the White House's Office of Management and Budget for 2:30 pm on the first day of the lame-duck congressional session. Only one witness is scheduled to testify: Dudley.

OIRA was created through the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 and has been a vehicle for pushing through the policies and priorities of presidents since Ronald Reagan. OIRA often operates outside of public scrutiny, yet has enormous sway over agency actions. All information collection efforts that affect 10 or more people (e.g., surveys, reporting requirements) must be approved by OIRA. All major regulations must also go through OIRA screening.

Many corporate and conservative interests look on OIRA as an advocate in reducing government regulation. Many in the public interest community view OIRA as a significant barrier in pursuing public protections. OIRA not only oversees agency regulatory transactions, it sets the policies by which agencies do assessments of whether to create regulations.

The last OIRA administrator, John Graham, who left earlier this year bound for academia, was accused of tilting the scales decidedly in favor of industry. Graham's history regarding regulation also made his nomination highly controversial, and Graham received the second most "no" votes (37) after John Ashcroft for any nomination in Bush's first term.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), the chair of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, has not scheduled a mark-up to report out the Dudley nomination, though the chair could quickly call for such a mark-up. [ED note: an earlier version of this article indicated that there were rumors Collins might have a mark-up by the end of the week of the hearing. On Oct. 26, Collins' office confirmed that they have not scheduled a mark-up.] In the past, Collin's has often sought to report out nominees with unanimous consent, a tactic that might prove difficult with such widespread opposition to Dudley's nomination.

On Oct. 23, 12 leading national environmental groups sent a joint letter to the oversight committee urging the committee "to oppose Susan Dudley's nomination." The groups also called on the committee "to ask President Bush to withdraw her nomination, unless her views can receive a full airing." The environmental groups describe Dudley as "far outside the mainstream."

This sentiment was echoed in a sign-on letter developed by Public Citizen and circulated by OMB Watch. In less than 24 hours, the sign-on letter received more than 100 organizational signatories. Additionally, an alert by OMB Watch generated roughly 2,000 emails to the Senate in as much time opposing the Dudley nomination. All of which indicates just how considerable is opposition to Dudley's nomination within the public interest community.

Dudley appears far more ideologically driven than Graham. So if Graham's nomination received 37 votes during a period of popularity for Bush, many wonder what will is in store for the Dudley nomination with Bush's popularity waning.

This would not be the first time Dudley was under the employ of OIRA, and recently, as the head of the industry-backed Mercatus Center, she has written extensively about regulatory issues. These writings, considered extreme even by some of her conservative colleagues, led Public Citizen and OMB Watch to recently conclude that Dudley is unfit to serve.

Dudley's anti-regulatory leanings have led her to advocate against stronger health standards regarding arsenic in our drinking water; against government requirements for air bags in automobiles, and against the very existence of OSHA regulations. She has written, "There is no economic justification for a federal role in defining construction practices and determining wages, as required by the Davis-Bacon Act." She has even argued that ozone, the key component of smog, is good for you since it protects against skin cancer. For more on Dudley's views, visit /files/regs/dudley.

Recently six former OIRA administrators sent a letter to the oversight committee describing Dudley as a person of "integrity, experience, and relevant training." But even that letter did not endorse her. Instead, the six past OIRA administrators say the "nomination merits careful scrutiny and deliberation" and they urge "prompt and fair-minded Senate review" of Dudley's nomination. This was similar to a letter they sent regarding John Graham's nomination.

To email the Senate and ask that lawmakers vote 'no' to the Dudley nomination, click here.