Politics, Benefit-Cost Analysis and Centralized Regulatory Review

Professor Revesz has written an interesting article titled Congress and the Executive: Challenging the Anti-Regulatory Narrative.  In it he concludes:

Furthermore, in a troubling development, the Trump Administration’s has turned away from cost-benefit analysis in order to carry out its anti-regulatory agenda, disregarding an established bipartisan consensus that stretched back several decades.

Whether or not one agrees with his conclusion it emphasizes the importance of preserving critical executive orders as emphasized in this post so they can be used to referee such disputes.

OIRA’s Formative Years

Read a detailed account of the ascendancy of centralized regulatory review beginning with the Johnson Administration through the Reagan Administration. The text is accompanied by footnotes which contain originial source material.




The Iconic Executive Order 12291: The Precedent for the Preservation of Critical Executive Orders and Centralized Regulatory Review

In this age represented by a near gatling gun approach to the issuance of Executive Orders the academic community is to be complimented for devoting increasingly greater attention to the institutional standing of well-reasoned, peer reviewed Presidential instruments, including both Executive Orders and Proclamations, that stand the test of time. In doing so they might help quell the current state of chaos in the administrative state, see Administrative Law in a Time of Chaos

Washington Post on Holding Parents Accountable For School Violence

Several months ago the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness posted its views on dealing with school violence. Subsequently the Washington Post published a companion article that reached a  similar conclusion.  To view the Washington Post article,  CRE  comments thereto and the attendant public comments on both click here.