Citizen Health & Safety

Polluted Logic: How EPA's ozone standard illustrates the flaws of cost-benefit analysis

This analysis tracks EPA's recent revision of the national standard for ozone and uses it as a case example of the problems of cost-benefit analysis in regulatory decision making.

read in full

Sunset Commission Legislation in the 110th Congress

This analysis describes the problems with sunset commissions and compares three sunset commission proposals that have emerged in the 110th Congress.

read in full

Recap of Oral Arguments in Supreme Court Preemption Case

Dec 5, 2007 by Matthew Madia

The New York Times has a recap of the oral arguments heard yesterday by the Supreme Court in Riegel v. Medtronic. As Reg•Watch blogged yesterday, the issue is whether federal regulation preempts state common law claims against medical device manufacturers.

read in full

Study Proves No Need for Conflicted FDA Panel Members

Dec 4, 2007 by Matthew Madia

In March, FDA issued draft guidelines that would revise its criteria for determining whether scientific advisory committee members have financial conflicts of interest. FDA advisory committees are standing panels comprised of individuals considered experts in a particular field. They provide advice to FDA on matters such as drug and medical device safety.

read in full

States Sue EPA for Reduced Reporting on Toxics

Twelve states are suing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over the December 2006 regulation that weakened the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, leading the suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Nov. 28. Joining the suit are attorneys general from Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and Vermont, and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

read in full

Political Influence Leads to Revised Endangered Species Decisions

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) will revise seven of eight decisions made under the Endangered Species Act program after reviewing them for improper political interference. The four-month review came as a result of a Department of Interior inspector general's investigation of allegations that former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Julie A. MacDonald, intimidated staff and changed the scientific information agency scientists developed for decisions about listing or delisting threatened or endangered species.

read in full

Scientific Wrangling over Air Quality Standard for Lead

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing to revise the national standard for airborne lead pollution, but differing scientific opinions among federal officials are further complicating a protracted rulemaking effort. The prevailing interpretation may have a significant impact on the agency's decision to tighten or weaken the standard.

read in full

Snowmobile Plan for Yellowstone Ignores Environmental Impacts

For at least a decade, the limit on snowmobiles in Yellowstone National Park has been the subject of a pitched battle between conservationists and snowmobile advocates. The National Park Service (NPS) has announced a limit on snowmobile use in Yellowstone. As expected, NPS will allow 540 snowmobiles per day, an amount close to double the daily average from the previous winter.

read in full

Multinationals Push for New Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulations

Two calls-to-action on cutting greenhouse gas emissions were released Nov. 30, shortly before world leaders met in Bali to begin outlining a global agreement to succeed the Kyoto Protocol. First, business leaders from 150 global firms issued a communiqué calling for "a comprehensive, legally binding United Nations framework to tackle climate change." Second, a report sponsored by a coalition of U.S businesses and nongovernmental organizations said the U.S. could reduce its output of greenhouse gas emissions substantially using existing technologies and low-cost emerging alternatives, but to do so "will require strong, coordinated, economy-wide action that begins in the near future."

read in full

High Court Hears Preemption Arguments

Dec 4, 2007 by Matthew Madia

A case being argued before the Supreme Court today could affect the way consumers seek redress from companies when harmed by faulty drugs or medical devices. The case, Riegel v. Medtronic, "was brought by the family of a New York man who suffered severe medical complications when a balloon catheter burst during a procedure to clear his arteries," according to The Los Angeles Times. Medtronic is arguing federal regulations serve as a shield which protects it from tort claims. Since FDA approved the medical device, Medtronic believes it bears no responsibility for injuries caused by its use.

read in full

Pages

  • ©2025 Project On Government Oversight
  • All Rights Reserved.
  • This an archive site of the materials produced by the Center for Effective Government (formerly OMB Watch) and is maintained by the Project On Government Oversight.