Restructuring of Centralized Regulatory Review?

Centralized regulatory review has been in operation for some forty five years, beginning with the implementation of the Nixon Quality of  Life Review.  If a decision were made to modify the existing process some of the reasons for such an action are  contained in this post.

A successful restructuring of centralized regulatory review will probably be dependent upon  the presence of policy entrepreneurs in the Executive Office of the President who among other things  develop a nationwide constituency for centralized regulatory review, if not for OIRA, see this post.

                                              Trending: Track and Trace

Building A Nationwide Constituency for OIRA

As of December 31, 2016

Here are the results of a multiyear program to educate our citizenry of the important role played by the Office of Information and  Regulatory Affairs, OIRA, in the White House Office of Management and Budget.

A Synopsis

Progress on the Web 

Progress at Universities

The Repository

Lack of Stakeholder Support for OIRA

 

Focus on OIRA

OIRA@2050

Bruce Levinson, Editor
January 17  Department of Education Rules: The Arts Don’t Pay Enough, Teaching Them is Prohibited

January 13  Improving Regulatory Analysis at Independent Agencies

January 12  Retired Vicar Wins UK Data Quality Act Case Against Friends of the Earth

January 11  This Could Be the Moment for Rolling Back Regulators’ ‘Soft Despotism’

January 10  White House Takes Final Steps to Revamp “The Common Rule” Medical Research Rule

January 9  Improving the Process of Making Rules at Independent Agencies

January 4  Government regulation doesn’t have to stay stuck in the 20th century

Trump nominee to head OMB could create hurdles for CFPB regulations

From: Ballard Spahr

It has been reported that President-elect Donald Trump has nominated South Carolina Republican Congressman Mick Mulvaney to be Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  Mr. Mulvaney has been described as a “staunch deficit hawk” and his nomination is viewed as sending a signal that federal regulations are likely to face tough scrutiny in a Trump administration.

House conservatives want Trump to undo regulations on climate, FDA, Uber

Editor’s Note: For practical guidance on how the Trump Administration can achieve its deregulatory intentions, see here.

From: The Washington Post

By David Weigel

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), the incoming chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, used a meeting with Donald Trump to deliver a list of 232 regulations that the incoming president could repeal immediately. “We felt like it was important to put together a real working document,” Meadows told CNN.

The list, shared by Meadows’s office, includes President George W. Bush’s order restricting access to executive branch papers and Federal Aviation Administration regulations that limit overland supersonic flights. The rationale for repealing that last regulation, in its entirety: “Make Sonic Boom Again.”

OIRA Options for the Trump Administration

Editor’s Note: We are very pleased with the reception our readers have had to the following post. In particular that the prestigious Notice and Comment website sponsored by two of the nation’s leading legal institutions, Yale Law School and The American Bar Association Section on Administrative Law, took the lead in the publication of the article.

The responses we have received have been so great that it now ranks in the top five publications of CRE as so noted in the Featured Items section of the CRE homepage. Although the primary target of the article are members of the incoming Administration we also realize that many of our readers either serve as advisors to these individuals or command influential positions which will bring them into contact with the said individuals.

The Congressional Review Act and Chevron Deference

Publisher’s Note: This website is visited frequently by the press, Congressional staff and agency staff. CRE accepts comments from named individuals as well as anonymous comments in the comment section below.

In the last several days considerable attention is being given to use of a sleeper act, the Congressional Review Act (CRA), as a mechanism for correcting a perceived tilt in the regulatory state. Simultaneously there is increasing attention to limiting the Chevron deference by the enactment of proposed legislation (Separation of Powers Restoration Act).

Recommendations from Former OIRA Administrators to the Incoming Administration

Publisher’s Note: This is a must read for students and supporters of a effective regulation.

This report contains a set of recommendations for the Trump Administration that, if implemented, would strengthen the process of regulatory review. These recommendations reflect the general consensus of a group of former OIRA Administrators and Acting Administrators who served under both political parties. These recommendations can be accomplished by executive action.

 

A Disciplined Regulatory Initiative: Announcing that the Data Quality Act is Judicially Reviewable

The Data Quality Act (DQA), aka the Information Quality Act, allows members of the public to file citizen petitions to obtain corrections of inaccurate information disseminated by federal agencies. Consequently the DQA provides a means for the public to obtain corrections in press releases, reports and regulations issued by federal agencies. In essence the DQA merely requires that federal agencies tell the truth.

Letter to the American Bar Association on Law School Curricula

Publisher’s Note: Kudo’s to the ABA for placing the CRE recommendation on its meeting agenda. “An OIRA that is understood is an OIRA that is respected.”

Memorandum

To:          Standards and Accreditation Committee, American Bar Association

From:     Jim Tozzi[1], Center for Regulatory Effectiveness

Subject: Increasing Attorney Expertise in the Regulatory State

The purpose of this memorandum is to request that the Committee on Standards and Accreditation address the increasingly greater subject matter deficit in law school curricula which makes it difficult for graduates to cope with the broad reach of the regulatory state.