Regulatory Policy - RegWatch

RegWatch:

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Congress and White House Stuck in the Mud on Fuel Economy

Rep. John Dingell has written an interesting piece in today's issue of The Hill. Dingell discusses the virtue of CAFE standards (the minimum miles per gallon requirements automakers must meet) and the need to combat global climate change.

However, the article reflects the Michigan Democrat's tension between progressive environmental policy and appeasing his automaker constituents. Dingell touts the success of the CAFE program (which he helped create) but offers more questions than solutions in regulating carbon emissions:

Are CAFE standards in their current form still the most effective way to achieve their stated objective? Further still, has the objective changed?

Can a regulatory structure created in the 1970s evolve in such a way as to combat a 21st century challenge with 21st century technologies?

He then goes on to warn Congress against rushing into any climate change legislation, and points out that his Energy and Commerce Committee will hold nine hearings in the month of March on energy independence and climate change.

The article comes the same day as an Energy and Air Quality subcommittee hearing on President Bush's CAFE reform proposal. According to Reuters, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle expressed concern over the cap-and-trade approach which would avoid actually raising fuel efficiency standards.

Congressional wonkery aside, the reality is improved CAFE standards would mitigate carbon emissions and save drivers money. With measures of American fuel economy in decline, it is past time Congress get its act together and improve federal fuel economy standards.

Posted by Matt Madia, 04:57:55 PM

Bush Executive Order Will Make It Harder to Protect the Public

OMB Watch's Drs. Gary Bass and Rick Melberth have an op-ed posted on CommonDreams.org. The piece derides President Bush's recent changes to E.O. 12866:

His actions ... set in motion changes that could further delay or hinder public health, safety, environmental, and civil rights protections.

Read the whole thing here

Posted by Matt Madia, 10:21:27 AM

Thursday, February 22, 2007

Latest Watcher

Be sure to check out the latest issue of our biweekly newsletter, The Watcher. Reg policy articles this time:

Congress Holds Hearings on Bush's Changes to Regulatory Process

FDA Drug Approval Process under Scrutiny

Big Rigs and Big Government

TomPaine.com has an interesting opinion piece on a proposed regulation that would deem 97 foot long rigs safe for highway use. These rigs have four separate trucks behind the cab, and are longer than an NBA basketball court. What's really galling is that the law being implemented would violate the principles of federalism by overriding current state statutes:

Under current federal regulations, states are allowed to impose an overall length limit of 75 feet on four-ways. Almost every state has imposed such limits… [T]his federal law is likely to be interpreted as actually prohibiting any state from protecting its residents by passing a law restricting four-ways to less than the 97-foot federal standard.

As a native Pennsylvanian, I wonder how these trucks will be able to navigate the obstacle course that is the PA turnpike. I hope the Bush administration does not make me find out.

Posted by Matt Madia, 10:16:46 AM

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Growing Furor over CPSC Vacancy

As Reg Watch blogged last week, a commissioner vacancy has weakened the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) has introduced legislation to fix the problem, and a recent Washington Post column and New Standard article are drawing more attention to the issue. Public interest groups are going on the record and the public is realizing America needs a fully-functioning CPSC to protect citizens from hazardous products.

When will President Bush respond by making the commissioner appointment and ending the manipulation of this independent agency?

Posted by Matt Madia, 04:19:43 PM

Thursday, February 15, 2007

White House Disregard for Product Safety

We have become used to President Bush appointing friends and others of like-minded ideology to important agency posts. Now it seems as though the White House has made a new friend — vacancy.

As BNA news service (subscription) reports this morning, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) — an independent agency charged with protecting the American public from dangerous products — can no longer promulgate new regulations. CPSC has been dealing with a commissioner vacancy since July 2006 and, under agency rules, no longer possesses the voting quorum necessary to regulate on behalf of public safety. President Bush hasn't nominated a new commissioner, severely diminishing CPSC's power.

This lapse, combined with proposed budget cuts to CPSC, tells the American people that product safety is not a priority of this administration. Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) is pushing for legislation to allow CPSC to operate without a quorum for another six months, but this will only be a temporary fix. The White House ought to be ashamed of its underhanded attempts to delay product safety regulation.

Posted by Matt Madia, 12:09:30 PM

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Another Look at the Reg. Policy Officer
I just came across a St. Louis Post-Dispatch Op-Ed from last week, which provides an interesting analysis of the regulatory policy officer recently created under Bush's new executive order. The E.O. creates a new politically appointed position within each agency, the regulatory policy officer, who would ensure the White House's regulatory agenda was carried out in the agencies. The Post-Dispatch editors compare the RPO to the zampoliti who "enforced party discipline" in Soviet military units.

How odd that now, 15 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, the concept of the political officer has returned - and in Washington of all places. . . . These regulatory zampoliti will be political appointees operating outside the civil service chain of command, charged with making sure that the agencies don't stray from the president's policies. . . .
Despite friends in high places, business interests complained that down in the bowels of the bureaucracy, pointy-headed regulators still had too much power. Bush's order will give political appointees the final say over the rules and guidance documents set forth by regulators.

It might sound cynical, but considering Bush's recent attempts to usurp the Senate's role in political appointments by giving failed-nominee Susan Dudley an advisory position, it's probably not too far from the truth.

Posted by Genevieve Smith, 01:53:51 PM

Two House Committees Examine Bush Regulatory Amendments

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.

Posted by Matt Madia, 12:52:21 PM

Monday, February 12, 2007

Reg Watch in Review Debuts

Today, OMB Watch's Regulatory Policy Program releases the first edition of Reg Watch in Review. Reg Watch in Review will be a bi-weekly email highlighting the most recent and pressing news from the regulatory world. If you are not already signed up for OMB Watch's Regulatory Policy Updates, and you would like to receive Reg Watch in Review, please sign up by clicking here.

Friday, February 09, 2007

House Oversight on Bush's E.O. Amendments

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.

Posted by Matt Madia, 09:35:19 AM

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Latest Watcher

Be sure to check out the latest issue of our biweekly newsletter, The Watcher. Reg policy articles this time:

Media, Congress Begin to Examine Bush's Executive Order on Regulatory Process

Congress Steps Up Oversight of Executive Branch

Friday, February 02, 2007

Tony Snow Addresses Amendments to Regulatory Process ... Sort of

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?

Read Tony Snow's comments here

Posted by Matt Madia, 01:11:49 PM

Latest Entries by Theme

Cost-Benefit Analysis