Some investigative journalism at the Federal Times shows just how little rulemaking federal agencies have engaged in during the Bush administration:

Many regulatory agencies have submitted fewer rules during the current Bush administration's two terms than during Bill Clinton's tenure, or even during George H.W. Bush's single term.

The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), for example, submitted 91 new rules to the Office of Management and Budget during the first President Bush's term, and 83 during the Clinton administration. But during the current administration, when U.S. meat and poultry production has increased by nearly 10 percent, FSIS has proposed just 16 new rules.

And that pattern has been mirrored at other agencies. Compared with the Clinton administration, rulemaking is down more than 50 percent at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); down 57 percent at the Environmental Protection Agency; and down almost 20 percent at the Federal Aviation Administration.

The article ties the administration's anti-regulatory attitude to a host of health and safety scandals that have dominated headlines:

Failures by [FSIS] led to the nation's largest-ever beef recall. A wave of imported "toxic toys," containing everything from lead paint to the date-rape drug, spooked consumers during the holiday season. And high-profile industrial accidents, like the explosion at a sugar plant in Georgia last month, raised questions about the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's effectiveness.

It's hard to pinpoint why agencies are submitting fewer rules to OMB, but Reg•Watch has two theories. Maybe the delay and politicization associated with the OMB review process has created a chilling effect in federal agencies. OMB's constant efforts to dismiss scientific conclusions (i.e. EPA's recent ozone standard), or the stall tactics the office uses to delay action (i.e. the rule to protect the North Atlantic right whale), may have depressed expectations that public protection standards can quickly move through the regulatory gauntlet unscathed.

Another theory is that political appointees inside federal agencies are nipping regulations in the bud. Throughout his administration, Bush has installed men and women with close ties to the industries they regulate who may not look favorably upon rules they believe would hurt corporate bottom lines. Considering the lack of transparency in most federal agencies, it would be relatively easy for one of these officials to kill a proposed regulation before the public is notified.

Maybe it's both, maybe neither, but one thing is for sure: when the book is closed on the Bush administration, there will be a lot of catching up to do and countless messes to clean up.

In "Rush Is On to Cement Regulations," Wall Street Journal reporter Elizabeth Williamson previews some regulations the Bush administration may finalize in its waning days of power:

Industries from agriculture to power are pressing for the Bush administration to act on a slew of pending regulations, betting they will do worse no matter who wins the White House in the fall.

Among the rules the article mentions:

• Changes to the Family and Medical Leave Act;
• Reduced limits on emissions from power plants near national parks; and
• Reporting exemptions for farms that produce air pollution from animal waste.

In today's Washington Post, Bloomberg news columnist Cindy Skrzycki covers the Small Business Administration's recent release of its Top 10 list of rules it is asking federal agencies to review and modify. Although it is difficult for an agency to start and finish a rulemaking in a year, these rules may get some attention in the coming months.

EPA has long been considering a revision to one of the rules on the Top 10 list, and will likely try to finalize it before Bush's time runs out. The rule would make it easier for facilities to dump hazardous waste under the guise of promoting recycling of the toxic material. According to the Sierra Club, "If the rule were adopted, an estimated three billion pounds of hazardous waste annually would no longer be regulated as waste under certain conditions."

Reg•Watch has also been blogging about some regulatory proposals under agency consideration. Among them, a rule to ease current restrictions on gun possession in national parks, and a series of rules which would reduce federal funding for state-administered Medicaid programs.

If you know of other rules that are in the regulatory pipeline and, for better or worse, the Bush administration may try to finalize in the next ten months, email Reg•Watch and tell us. We'll keep posting updates as the months roll on.

Sen. Ted Kennedy's Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has released a report on the Crandall Canyon Mine disaster. The collapse occurred in August 2007, trapping and killing six miners. Days later, three workers were killed during a rescue attempt.

The 75-page report contains lots of interesting yet disappointing information about Murray Energy, the mine's owner, and the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration. One of the most disturbing is that MSHA disregarded the opinion of one of its analysts when it approved Murray Energy's plan to conduct retreat mining at Crandall Canyon.

Federal law requires MSHA approve plans for retreat mining — the controversial technique in which miners remove support pillars in order to intentionally collapse areas of the mine no longer in use.

The report says MSHA engineer Pete Del Duca reviewed Murray Energy's plan for Crandall Canyon and recommended MSHA officials reject it. The head of MSHA's district office for the area signed-off on the recommendation and notified the mine's manager.

After MSHA sent the letter, one of Del Duca's superiors, Billy Owens, met with a representative from Murray Energy. "After this conversation, Owens told Del Duca that his analysis was flawed in several respects." Del Duca told Kennedy's committee that no one asked him to reevaluate the retreat mining plan. Del Duca's analysis had been dismissed.

According to the report, "Del Duca's analysis was prescient." A mine collapse in March and the deadly collapse in August both occurred "beyond the points Del Duca predicted would be safe."

The Kennedy report and investigation exhibits can be downloaded here. The discussion of the Del Duca analysis begins on page 36.