March 16, 2016

DOL, OMB May Blunt Fiduciary Rule, Delay It Until Late May

From: InsuranceNewsNet.com

By

***

OMB will use the extra 30 days because of the importance of the regulation and the number of parties participating in its appraisal, the source said. During the review period, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) division of OMB consults with DOL and other White House entities such as at the Council of Economic Advisors, National Economic Council, and Domestic Policy Council.

These parties analyze possible impacts of the regulation and negotiate proposed changes before the rule is finalized. OIRA will adjudicate the comments from the other White House entities before approving the final regulation.

March 14, 2016

Here’s Why a New Regulation Could Mean Trouble

From: TheBlaze

Here’s Why a New Obama Regulation Could Mean Trouble for Dave Ramsey and Suze Orman

***

The rule is currently under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget and could take effect as early as next month. President Barack Obama first proposed the rule in April 2015.

***

However, the proposed rule doesn’t just require disclosure of third-party payers but also expands the definition of a fiduciary, while also getting involved in an area previously reserved for the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Read Complete Article

March 7, 2016

Arkansas AG Rutledge Speaks Against Government Overreach During Fort Smith Chamber Breakfast

From: Times Record

By Justin Bates

Rutledge has joined attorneys general from 12 other states to oppose President Barack Obama’s proposed Persuader Advice Exemption Rule, which, she said, could force small businesses to disclose communications with outside counsel in labor relations matters.

The attorneys general submitted a letter dated Feb. 4 to Howard Shelanski, Obama’s administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which stated that the rule would inflict harm on small business.

Read Complete Article

March 6, 2016

Regulatory Cost Assessment Act of 2014

Shown Here:
Introduced in Senate (12/08/2014)   Senator Mike Lee    S. 2988

Regulatory Cost Assessment Act of 2014 – Amends the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to establish and enforce a federal regulatory budget.

Requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to submit jointly to the President and Congress an analysis of the cost and economic effects of federal regulations, including recommendations for improvements to the regulatory budgeting process.

Requires CBO to submit: (1) a baseline projecting the federal regulatory cost over at least five fiscal years, (2) analysis of the regulatory cost of legislation reported by congressional committees, and (3) look-back reviews comparing CBO estimates with actual costs.

A Broad Base of Support for a Regulatory Budget

4/21/2016  Detroit News on a  Regulatory Budget

4/19/2016  Weekly Standard publishes an article on the regulatory budget.

4/10/2016  Local North Carolina newspaper  supports a regulatory budget.

4/8/2016  Cato sets the stage for a regulatory  budget.

4/7/2016    New Boston Post explains the need for a regulatory budget.

4/6/2016   U.S. Regulatory Budgeting: Take a Page from Canada is online.

4/05/2016  Wayne Crews publishes an article in Forbes on the need for a regulatory budget.

4/04/2016  American Spectator publishes an article on the runaway cost of federal regulation.

March 4, 2016

EEOC Proposes To Collect New Data On Pay

From: Williams & Jensen

By Shane Doucet and Michael Kans

As part of the Obama Administration’s initiative to advance equal pay policies, on January 29, 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released a proposal that would expand the information many private entities must report to the EEOC. Specifically, the proposed revision would require all employers with 100 or more employees (both private industry and federal contractors) to collect and report data on pay and hours-worked. . . .

Read Complete Article

February 25, 2016

3 Big Holes in DOL Fiduciary Proposal, ICI Says

From: ThinkAdvisor

On one-year anniversary of Obama endorsement of the proposal, ICI sends letter to the OMB about DOL’s justification for the rule

By Melanie Waddell, Washington Bureau Chief, Investment Advisor Magazine

Letters of opposition continue flowing into the Office of Management Budget as it reviews the Department of Labor’s rule to change the definition of fiduciary on retirement advice.

The Investment Company Institute on Monday told OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) that DOL’s rule must include “significant new data” in its regulatory impact analysis to support DOL’s “massive overhaul of the retirement marketplace” and said there were three major factual holes in the DOL’s proposal.

February 22, 2016

COOL repeal rule-making now under review

From: Feedstuffs

The regulatory rule-making for the removal of country-of-origin labeling (COOL) requirements for beef and pork muscle cuts, ground beef and ground pork has been logged for review at the Office of Management & Budget (OMB).

In December, Congress approved a fiscal 2016 catch-all federal spending bill that included repeal of the meat labeling provision of the COOL law in order to avoid trade retaliation from Canada and Mexico. OMB must review all regulations before they are implemented.

Read Complete Article

February 18, 2016

OMB Reviewing EPA Rebuttal To GAO Criticisms Of CWA Rule Campaign

From: Inside EPA

The White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) is reviewing EPA’s draft formal response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) criticisms that the agency violated legal restrictions on use of appropriations in how it promoted its Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule, says EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy.

Read Complete Article (paywall)

February 14, 2016

The Data Quality Act and the Continuing War on Industry Sponsored Science

The controversy concerning the integrity of industry sponsored science has been going on for years.  However what continues to be absent from the debate is the Data [Information] Quality Act which was passed some fifteen years ago with the intent of breaking this impasse.

More specifically the Act sets standards for all scientific data disseminated by any federal agency. In addition it sets standards for all data submitted to a federal agency by an outside party.

Why then has not this tie breaker entered in to the industry sponsored science debate? It is most certainly not because it is not needed.