Editor’s Note: The author correctly highlights in the article below that FDA is required by OMB Circular A-4, Regulatory Analysis, “to analyze options that are not currently legal so as to inform the president and Congress when there are more efficient ways of solving a particular social problem than Congress had envisioned.”
From: Mercatus Center/George Mason University — Public Interest Comments, Docket No: FDA-2011-N-0921
Michael L. Marlow
Introduction
From: Regulation
By Susan E. Dudley
Last January 14th, the Environmental Protection Agency published a final rule in the Federal Register updating the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter. The rule reduces by 20 percent the allowable annual concentrations of fine particles less than 2.5 micrometers in size (PM 2.5), from the current 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) that was affirmed in 2006, to 12.0 μg/m3.
From: Investors Business Daily
By HENRY I. MILLER
Economic prospects for the nation remain dismal for the foreseeable future, especially in the context of historical trends.
Following recessions, the economy usually comes roaring back — and the longer and deeper the recession, the more robust economic growth tends to be as productivity and job-growth surge.
But the recovery from the recession of the last decade has been anemic at best, and is expected to remain comparatively weak at least through the remainder of Obama’s second term.
From: The Hill/RegWatch
By Megan R. Wilson and Ben Goad
The Obama administration’s failure to release its legally required regulatory agenda has business groups worried that they could be blindsided by costly new federal rules.
Federal regulators are required to release a Unified Agenda in the spring and fall — typically occurring in April and October — that details plans and anticipated deadlines for regulations.
But Obama officials have missed the spring deadline for the second year in a row, stoking anxiety for businesses that want to know what mandates and rules are coming down the pike.
From: RegBlog
Michael A. Livermore
Cost-benefit analysis, while embraced by both political parties over the course of the past three decades, is still feared by many progressives in the United States. But as environmental concerns have spread around the world, this tool is lighting a path in many developing countries toward a new generation of environmental policies to protect public health, climate stability, and natural resources. This new role for cost-benefit analysis challenges the sometimes stale and suffocating way in which discussions over cost-benefit analysis are often framed here at home.
Editor’s Note: Another name for “Sue and Settle” is Regulation by Litigation.
From: RegBlog
Eric Lorber
Can private individuals and organizations use so-called “sue and settle” lawsuits to set federal environmental regulatory policy without going through the normal regulatory process?
Concerned that environmental groups are employing this tactic to secure environmentally-friendly regulations, congressional Republicans have proposed the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act of 2013. The Act – sponsored by Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Representative Doug Collins (R-GA) – aims to prevent these sue and settle lawsuits, which arguably allow environmental groups to undermine the public’s ability to comment on pending regulations.
From: HuffPo/Project on Government Oversight
By Scott Amey
Last month, Norman Dong from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) was a presenter at the Maryland Association of Certified Public Accountants (MACPA) conference in College Park, Maryland. Dong’s presentation explained how the Obama administration is working to be more efficient and cost effective. For example, he summarized ways OMB is improving federal financial management through administrative savings, reducing property usage, cracking down on improper payments to individuals and medical providers, and adding transparency. These were central themes in the president’s proposed FY 2014 Budget, too.
From: RegWatch/The Hill’s Regulation Blog
By Julian Hattem and Ben Goad
While employees at some federal agencies are already taking unpaid time off, many regulatory agencies are dodging sequestration’s cleaver.
It’s not just air traffic controllers who are escaping furloughs triggered by across-the-board spending cuts.
While employees at some federal agencies are already taking unpaid time off, those at many regulatory agencies are dodging sequestration’s cleaver.
More than two months since the sweeping across-the-board federal budget cuts first hit, and days after President Obama signed a bill to keep air traffic controllers on the job, many agencies continue to have no plans to hand out furlough notices.
From: RegWatch/The Hill
By Megan R. Wilson
The printing and graphic design industry wants the Obama administration to hurry up and regulate the rags that are used to sop up hazardous chemicals.
The draft of a final rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been sitting at the White House for more than a year, and the Printing Industries of America and the Specialty Graphic Imaging Association had one question for the White House during a meeting last week: Where’s our rule?
From: Heritage Foundation
By James L. Gattuso and Diane Katz
Regulatory burdens on Americans increased by nearly $70 billion during President Obama’s first term in office, during which federal agencies imposed 131 new major regulations. In 2012 alone, the Administration issued a total of $23.5 billion in new regulatory costs from 25 major rulemakings. Only two rules last year decreased burdens. Much more regulation is on the way, with another 131 major rules on the Administration’s agenda, including dozens more implementing Dodd–Frank and Obamacare. Action is needed by Congress, including requiring congressional approval of each new major regulation before it may take effect.