March 5, 2013

Regulation, Jobs, and America’s Global Competitiveness

Editor’s Note:  For information on OMB’s development of a Regulatory Budget for EPA, please see “Towards a Regulatory Budget: A Working Paper on the Cost of Federal Regulation,” Jim Tozzi, ed. (1979) in CRE’s OMB Papers library here.  The testimony of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former Director of the Congressional Budget Office, before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Reform, Commercial and Antitrust Law is attached here.  Below is an excerpt from Mr. Holtz-Eakin’s prepared statement:

The United Kingdom has already adopted an aggressive regulatory reform system that contains the following elements: “1) operating a ‘one in, two out’ rule for business regulation, 2) assessing the impact of each regulation, 3) reviewing the effectiveness of government regulations, 4) reducing regulation for small businesses, 5) improving enforcement of government regulations, and 6) using alternatives to regulation.” Although there are legal hurdles in the U.S. to adopting a “one in, two out,” framework, the other items above are already practiced with some regularity on the federal and state level; however, few are codified, and even fewer apply to independent agencies.

If a “one in, two out,” regulatory budget is adopted in the U.S., it could save billions of dollars. The UK reports that their budgeting system for new rules has saved £919 million, or approximately $1.3 billion, since the Cameron government instituted the program.

No Comments »

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Name not required for anonymous comments. Email is optional and will not be published.