Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

Home :  Regulatory Policy :  RegWatch : 
RegWatch:     

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

 R    E    G    •    W    A    T    C    H 


Monday, February 25, 2008

Coal Mine Safety Shortchanged by Years of Budget Cuts

Congress created the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) in 1977, placing a new federal focus on miner safety and health. In the past two years, a spike in coal mine fatalities and high-profile coal mine disasters have prompted many Americans and Congress to look to MSHA to improve miner safety, but years of budget cuts and the loss of qualified employees have left the agency struggling to fulfill its mission.

A new article by OMB Watch, the latest in our Bankrupting Government series, tracks the history of budget and staffing cuts at the agency with a particular focus on MSHA's coal mine safety and health program.

Click here for excerpts and neato line graphs

Posted by Matt Madia, 09:27:41 AM



Friday, February 22, 2008

A Second Chance for Krill Protection

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is resending to the White House a proposed policy to protect krill in U.S. waters off the west coast, according to BNA news service (subscription). Krill are small shrimp-like crustaceans abundant in the Pacific Ocean and a vital link in the marine food chain.

NOAA first proposed the policy in Feb. 2007. Even though krill is not currently fished in U.S. waters, NOAA experts — both within the agency and on an independent advisory board — recognized an opportunity to take a proactive step toward maintaining a sustainable marine ecosystem. In its proposal, NOAA's Pacific Fishery Management Council states, "The Council has agreed it is critical to take preventive action at this time to ensure that a krill fishery will not develop that could potentially harm krill stocks, and in turn harm other fish and non-fish stocks."

But, as OMB Watch reported in November, the policy was rejected by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) — the White House office in charge of reviewing federal rules and regulations.

According to BNA, NOAA officials are "cautiously optimistic" that OIRA will approve the rule the second time around. NOAA rulemakers are beefing up their argument that a disruption in krill stocks would negatively impact other kinds of fish.

Reg•Watch hopes OIRA lets the krill rule through its gauntlet but does not share NOAA's optimism. OIRA rejected the rule on the grounds NOAA had not properly identified a market failure in need of regulation. In a letter returning the rule to NOAA for reconsideration, OIRA complained NOAA did not adequately identify the need for regulation since krill is "completely unexploited" and "there are no known plans for exploitation."

Nothing has changed in regard to the potential for krill fisheries in U.S. waters, so, regardless of the quality of NOAA's analysis, OIRA's objection stands.

That's too bad, because the federal government shouldn't have to identify a market failure in order to address a problem. It seems NOAA's strategy of prevention and precaution is exactly the role we would want government to play. (Imagine if government officials had approached greenhouse gas emissions with such foresight.) As a nation, we cannot afford to stand idly by and hope that certain problems will resolve themselves.



Posted by Matt Madia, 04:32:40 PM



Wednesday, February 20, 2008

One Year Later, White House Still Sitting on Whale Protection Rule

Today, a rule that would protect the North Atlantic right whale celebrates its one year anniversary of being stuck in the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). Under Executive Order 12866, OIRA has 90 days to review regulations before they are finalized. In consultation with the issuing agency (in this case, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) OIRA may extend the review period by 30 days.

NOAA submitted the whale protection rule on Feb. 20, 2007. Therefore, OIRA has exceeded the review period by about eight months, and there is no end in sight.

The North Atlantic right whale is one of the most critically endangered marine species in the world. Although the species has benefited from federal protections for years, it is still having difficulty recovering. Collisions between whales and shipping vessels are a particularly serious problem.

In response, NOAA began working in 1999 on a federal rule to limit the speed of large shipping vessels traveling along the eastern seaboard. The speed limits would vary based on geographic location and season.

NOAA published a proposed rule (which OIRA also reviewed) in June 2006. Since receiving and reviewing public comments into early 2007, NOAA has been waiting for OIRA to give its approval.

OIRA may be delaying the rule to help out the shipping industry. In a May 3 letter to OIRA Administrator Susan Dudley, the World Shipping Council expressed opposition to the rule citing economic costs and questioning the validity of NOAA's research. The World Shipping Council represents some domestic but mostly foreign shippers.

The Ocean Conservancy has a timeline on the rulemaking and reported ship strikes of the right whale. According to the Ocean Conservancy, since NOAA published the proposed rule, there have been five reported ship strikes and three confirmed deaths.

While that may not sound like many, according to the Ocean Conservancy, "Only about 350 North Atlantic right whales are left, and the loss of even one whale is detrimental to the species."

The Ocean Conservancy also has an action alert on their website where you can send a letter to OIRA administrator Susan Dudley urging her to allow NOAA to finalize the rule. See the action alert here.



Posted by Matt Madia, 03:34:12 PM



Wednesday, February 13, 2008

OMB Watch up for Online Advocacy Award

Do you like OMB Watch? Would you like to boost our fragile self-esteem? Then please vote for us in the Golden Dot Awards, presented annually for excellence in online campaigning by the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University.

OMB Watch has been nominated for Best Issue Advocacy Blog. The nomination is for all three of our blogs: Advocacy Blog, Budget Blog, and Reg•Watch.

Vote here: polc.ipdi.org/GoldenDots/voting.htm

(OMB Watch has the utmost respect for the other candidates and has vowed to run a clean campaign.)



Posted by Matt Madia, 05:23:53 PM



Monday, February 11, 2008

Sign up for Reg Watch in Review

Reg•Watch in Review is a biweekly email update of recent news from the regulatory world. Reg•Watch in Review highlights regulatory process issues and stories about environmental, product safety, workplace safety, and scientific integrity policy.

Preview today's edition here, or sign up below.


Email Address:
*
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*






Friday, February 08, 2008

Big Oil Looks to White House to Weaken Ozone Standard

Big oil is knocking on the White House's door looking for sympathy over an EPA proposal to tighten the national standard for ozone, aka smog. On January 25, representatives from ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute met behind closed doors with officials from EPA and the White House Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). (Frank O'Donnell at the Blog for Clean Air has the full story.)

EPA's bid to tighten the ozone standard (from the current level of 0.084 ppm to somewhere between 0.070 and 0.075 ppm) has raised the ire of many industry representatives and anti-regulatory lobbyists like the National Association of Manufacturers. Detractors of the proposed ozone-reduction rule claim it would impose big costs on polluters and result in economic hardships for companies, employees, and consumers.

There are two big problems with that argument. First, the Clean Air Act prohibits EPA from considering economic impact when regulating ozone. The Supreme Court has upheld the prohibition. EPA must use the best available science to set a standard that will protect public health, regardless of compliance costs.

Second, those who claim big costs are relying on a deeply flawed cost-benefit analysis prepared by EPA and OIRA. Cost-benefit analysis in public policy is rarely helpful, and EPA's ozone rule is a good example of just how ridiculous it can be.

For one of the options EPA is considering (0.070 ppm), the cost-benefit analysis concluded potential costs of $20 billion or potential benefits of $23 billion. How is anyone supposed to draw a meaningful conclusion from a $43 billion range?

Furthermore, ozone exposure can shorten lives. Therefore, reducing ozone pollution can help people live better and live longer. How can anyone put a price tag on that?

For a more detailed discussion, read a recent opinion column from OMB Watch available at OurFuture.org: "How Bush Undermines Government Regulation"

(For a really detailed discussion, read OMB Watch's report, Polluted Logic: How EPA's ozone standard illustrates the flaws of cost-benefit analysis.)



Posted by Matt Madia, 04:29:46 PM



Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Bush Budget Ignores Consumer Safety Needs

President Bush's FY 2009 budget request, announced Feb. 4, proposes level funding for the Consumer Product Safety Commission — essentially a budget cut when adjusted for inflation. Bush has chosen to flat-line the agency's funding even though the public, media, and Congress are realizing resource shortfalls at CPSC have undermined its ability to ensure product safety.

A new article by OMB Watch tracks the history of budget and staffing cuts at the agency and shows how CPSC's resources have not kept pace with the growth of the industries it regulates, specifically the toy industry and the ATV industry.

Click here for excerpts and neato line graphs

Posted by Matt Madia, 11:19:29 AM



Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Bush Budget Would Cut Endocrine Disruptor and Other EPA Research

Yesterday, President Bush unveiled his FY 2009 budget proposal. There is plenty to be upset about in the proposal (as OMB Watch's Budget Blog has noted here.) Cuts in federal funding of environmental protection programs are among the most troubling.

Bush is proposing serious cuts at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — $330 million, or 4.4 percent. Sen. Barbara Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee has prepared a list of EPA programs and research activities that will be cut if Bush gets his way. (See the list here.)

Of note, Bush is proposing cuts to EPA's endocrine disruptor research and prevention programs. Boxer's committee says the proposal, "Cuts $3.6 million (35%) from efforts to help protect people from endocrine disruptors, dangerous chemicals that can harm human health at very low levels by interfering with the body's hormone systems."

EPA's endocrine disruptor program is already woefully behind schedule. In 1996, Congress passed legislation mandating EPA assess the health impacts of endocrine disruptors. In the summer of 2007, EPA finally got around to step one of the process — releasing a list of chemicals to be tested and laying out the process for assessing risk. Critics assailed EPA's program as scientifically flawed and accused the agency of designing experiments to purposefully minimize findings of adverse effects. Budget cuts are not likely to move the research along or improve the quality of the risk assessment process.

One last thing, from a note at the bottom of the committee's press release:

These figures are based upon summary tables provided by EPA. Normally, EPA provides a detailed "Budget Justification" document with an explanation of all budget figures, but this year has failed to do so, undermining the transparency of the President's proposed budget.

Not surprisingly, the administration isn't just attempting to gut domestic programs, it's trying to do it without telling Congress or the public.



Posted by Matt Madia, 11:36:40 AM



Friday, February 01, 2008

Appreciating the Benefits of Government Regulation

Check out a new opinion column by OMB Watch titled, "How Bush Undermines Government Regulation," available at the Campaign for America's Future website.

The column discusses how cost-benefit analysis in regulatory decision making can be a barrier to the promise of good government:

By using cost-benefit analysis and forcing regulators onto an economic playing field, detractors of government regulation have perverted its image into one of job loss and higher consumer prices.

Instead, we should look for the virtue in regulation — the ability of the government to keep workers safe, clean the environment, protect civil liberties, and save lives.

Read it here: "How Bush Undermines Government Regulation,"



Posted by Matt Madia, 11:01:01 AM




Latest Entries by Theme

All Themes

Enforcement

About This Blog

Rollbacks

Safety

Industry Influence

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues

Environment

Public Health

In the Courts

Oversight

In the White House

Most Recent Entries for RegWatch

Industry Ties Bind FDA Advisors

Right Whale Protection Rule Finally Here

Industry Pressuring EPA to Weaken Lead Rule

EPA Won't Keep Rocket Fuel out of Water

Roof Strength Rule Delayed Again

Bush Taking Credit for Whale Rule He Delayed

What Should the U.S. Do about China's Bad Milk?

Did OMB Block Asbestos Cleanup in Montana Town?

Whale Protection Rule Clears White House, 573 Days Later

EPA Just Kidding Around on Children's Health

Archived Entries for In the White House

October

September

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

August, 2004