Icons of the Administrative State

In that the Editor will approach his eightieth year in several weeks, he has been asked to provide the names of his contemporaries who not only made a noteworthy but also a unique impact on the functioning of the Administrative State, who did so both as a federal employee and in prior or subsequent non-federal employment, who were confirmed by the Senate and who are currently employed in their chosen field of endeavor.

Notwithstanding the aforementioned formidable list of qualifying conditions the names that come to mind in very short order include but are not limited to:

Quantum Law: An interdisciplinary exploration of quantum theory, law and ethics

Editor’s Note: The conference programme is available here.

St Mary’s University, London, UK will hold a conference on Quantum Law on Tuesday 26th June 2018.  Mr. Bruce Levinson, CRE Senior Vice President—Regulatory Intervention will make a presentation. For additional information contact Mr. Levinson at the CRE.

The following has been extracted from the brochures describing the program.

Quantum theory, the study of the nature and behaviour of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level, has come to occupy a dominant position in physics. It is however increasingly important also as both the basis of new or potential technologies and as a broader idea outside of subatomic physics itself, as both an artefact of popular culture but also a means of explaining other complex phenomena.

CRE’s Emphasis on Data Access and Data Quality is Rooted in the Paperwork Reduction Act Amendments of 1995

Notwithstanding regulatory folklore to the contrary, the Data Access Act and the Data Quality Act did not evolve from an overreach of centralized regulatory review but instead are based upon an explicit grant of authority from the Congress to the Director of OMB in the 1995 Amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

44 U.S. Code § 3504 – Authority and functions of Director

  • The Director shall oversee the use of information resources to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of governmental operations to serve agency missions, including burden reduction and service delivery to the public. In performing such oversight, the Director shall—(B) provide direction and oversee—

Support for EPA’s ANPRM on Benefit-Cost Analysis

EPA is issuing an NPRM to revamp its procedures for the use of benefit-cost analysis in evaluating its regulatory proposals.

OIRA alumnus Paul Noe states:

But one of the greatest yet most readily addressable impediments to smarter regulation is that regulatory agencies such as EPA too often have interpreted their statutes to limit their ability to fully engage in benefit-cost balancing and thus to comply with the presidential directives to do more good than harm. Yet, the actual text of the statutes typically does not prohibit benefit-cost balancing and thus does not require or authorize non-compliance with the presidential benefit-cost orders.

Accolades to the ABA for Encouraging the Participation of other Disciplines in Discussions of Administrative Law

There is a tendency for many disciplines to operate as a “silo”, that is to be unaware or insensitive to the contribution other disciplines might make to their discussions.  Some might think the last place that such an interdisciplinary approach might be undertaken is in the arcane legal arena; in particular Administrative Law whose domain includes one of the most significant areas of concern in a democracy — the separation of power among the three branches of government.

Not to worry, on June 8 the Administrative Law Section of the American Bar Association held a panel discussion on centralized regulatory review. In doing so 40% of the panel consisted of political scientists.

American Association for the Advancement of Science-Federal Focus Symposium on Data Access

In order to encourage discussion and debate on the Data Access issue, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and Federal Focus, Inc. jointly sponsored a symposium on the Data Access issue on February 26, 1999, in Washington, D.C. Specific focus of the discussion was on the data provisions contained in the FY 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277) and conference report. Under that Act, OMB was required to amend its Circular A-110 (“Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations”) to make publicly-funded research data available to the public through requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

Reader Question: OIRA Review of EPA Science Rule

A number of our readers have inquired as to why the OIRA review of the recently proposed NPRM on transparency in science was subject to a short period for review.

CRE does not know of the reason but it is not unusual for the head of an agency to request expedited review of an NPRM because it complements other actions to be taken in tandem with said document.

Others who have views on this question are encouraged to submit their views using the “comment” link in the right hand corner of this post.

Our readers are free to submit their questions to: contact@thecre.com

The Contribution of Political Scientists to the Evolution of Centralized Regulatory Review

An examination of the literature on the evolution of centralized regulatory review in the White House Office of Management and Budget will reveal that the legal community dominates the debate. Surprisingly considerably less attention is given to the aforementioned subject matter by members of the political science community notwithstanding the fact that generally, but not always, influencing rulemaking is a far more permanent mechanism for affecting the political system than is the publication of learned journal articles.

Fortunately, the sparsity of articles written by political scientists is changing. A case in point is the articles prepared by Professor Andrew Rudalevige of Bowdoin College and so presented at an event sponsored by the Hoover Institution.

The Continued Massacre of Students in Public Schools: Where is Parental Accountability?

For a number of years CRE (Center for Regulatory Effectiveness) has been asked its views on the regulation of firearms. This is a reasonable request because CRE’s expertise, developed over a half-century, is in analyzing proposals for additional regulation and examining the attendant range of alternatives.

We have avoided taking a public position on this topic because our primary interest is the process for conducting centralized regulatory review of regulations in the White House Office of Management and Budget independent of the substance of a particular regulation.

Providing the Academy with a Portal to Centralized Regulatory Review Issues

CRE appreciates the many comments we have received on our position on the EPA Science Rule.

Our friends on  the “left”, who in large part agree with the CRE position, were dumbfounded and a number of our friends on the “right” were either perplexed  or if not disappointed.

We use this recognition of our work to encourage our readers to visit our Regulatory Pacesetters website at http://www.thecre.com/forum8/

We are not a commercial website; we have no daily or weekly quotas.  CRE only makes a post when we observe, from the eyes of a practitioner and during the course of our day job as a regulatory watchdog, an issue of emerging importance which we believe should be explored in detail by members of the academy.