The OIRA Module: Published Research

Throughout this Forum we have discussed the importance of expanding the stakeholders in centralized regulatory review from the legal community to the public policy, political science and public administration committees. The following reference works highlight the important contribution the non-legal communities can make to the improvement of centralized regulatory review.

• Administrative Law for Public Managers
  
• Federal Service and the Constitution: The Development of the Public Employment Relationship
• Public Administration: Understanding Management, Politics, and Law in the Public Sector

Downloaded from the London School  of Economics Website

More than 2.5 million people work across the entire executive branch of the US government in hundreds of agencies and commissions. William West takes an in-depth look at how the President is able to oversee this vast bureaucracy. He writes that centralized influence over agency policy making is mostly reactive and based around the practice of regulatory review.  He argues that Presidents lack the organizational capacity to monitor and influence what agencies do in more than a selective way, and that this reactive  strategy allows the White House to focus its limited resources on agency initiatives that are problematic while ignoring the majority that are not.

Jim Tozzi Views On Centralized Regulatory Review

• Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum and National Archives and Records Administration, An Oral History Interview with JAMES J. TOZZI.

Energy Crisis Interviews: James J. Tozzi

• Richard Nixon Foundation

Confronting America’s First Energy Crisis

• Richard Nixon Foundation, National Archives, Center for Strategic and International Studies, (Ambassador Richard Fairbanks; James R. Schlesinger; and James J. Tozzi)

Centralized Regulatory Review  Officials by Administration

Leading Journal Articles

The OIRA Hall of Fame Library

The Essential Good Government Library

U.S. presidents and their policy staff often work closely with agencies throughout the federal government. Examples of this abound, and especially for Democratic presidents. I present a theory focused on one particular presidential tool: review of agency policymaking through the Office  of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).

 UCal Berkely Dissertation OIRA.pdf (249 KB)

CRE encourages authors’ of OIRA related material to post on this page:

Our editors will review the material and incorporate it into the OIRA Module at  http://www.thecre.com/oira_forum/ as appropriate.

Your submission will remain on this site for use by others in their refinement of the OIRA Module for their particular use.

Please see
http://thecre.com/ombpapers/Obama_review.html

http://thecre.com/ombpapers/centralrev.html

The GAO inquiry identified below failed to incorporate the following considerations:

1. If the public is given a copy of the regulation as submitted to OMB the public can than compare it  with the final regulation  issued by the agency to determine the impact of the interagency review.

2. It is naïve to believe that all changes in a final rule are  a result of OMB; for example, individuals from other agencies participate in the discussions and the sponsoring agency changes its position as a result of comments made  by others.

,

White House Regulatory Impact Analysis

With this document, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is providing a primer to assist agencies in developing regulatory impact analyses (RIAs), as required for economically significant rules by Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 12866, and OMB Circular A-4.

OECD Regulatory Impact Analyses

CMS’s Five-Star Quality Rating System for Part C and D Medicare is laudible concept for using informed consumer choice rather than command-and-control regulation to improve the healthcare market. However, because the Star Rating System is now used to determine bonuses, rebates, and eligibility, CMS is statutorily required to implement the ratings through Federal Register notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings.

In the letter to CMS attached here, the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness explains the deficiencies in how the ratings were developed. CRE concludes that CMS should

1. Follow Federal Register notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings for the star ratings programs.