Regulatory Transactions

From: Grainews.ca

Amendments to COOL law are only acceptable remedy: CCA

By: Dwayne Klassen

The U.S. government is not expected to comply with the World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling requiring changes to its mandatory country-of-origin labelling (COOL) law on meats and certain other foods by a May 23 deadline.

“The U.S. government could still pull a rabbit out of its hat and actually change the COOL regulations, but I don’t think they will,” said John Masswohl, director of government and international relations with the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association.

From: The Hill

By Megan R. Wilson

Groups in Massachusetts are urging the White House to reconsider a proposed rule on insurance premiums that they say is “borderline discriminatory” against small businesses.

In one of a few recent meetings with various organizations at the administration’s Office of Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), the Retail Association of Massachusetts and the South Shore Chamber of Commerce argued that the rate review rule — which is intended to keep premiums down — does not take costs to small businesses into account.

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:

From: Press Release

Contacts:
Senator Johnson: Brian Faughnan, Brian_Faughnan@ronjohnson.senate.gov (202) 224-5323
Chairman Issa: Ali Ahmad, Ali.Ahmad@mail.house.gov (202) 225-0037
Chairman Goodlatte: Brittney Bain, Brittney.Bain@mail.house.gov (202) 225-3951

For Immediate Release
February 28, 2013

Washington, D.C. – Senator Ron Johnson (WI) today joined several congressional colleagues in a letter to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulatory affairs office encouraging greater public input into the rulemaking process. In addition to Senator Johnson, the letter is signed by Chairman Darrell Issa (CA) of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Chairman Bob Goodlatte (VA) of the House Judiciary Committee.

From: RegWatch/The Hill’s Regulation Blog

By Megan R. Wilson

Environmental advocates and representatives from the oil-and-gas industry are flocking to the White House following the submission of a draft rule that would govern the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing on public lands.

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in January pulled a long-awaited proposed rule to regulate hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking,” after receiving a flood of public comments and push-back from industry. A new draft was sent to the White House on Jan. 22, but the document will not become public until the BLM officially proposes it.

From: RegBlog

Erik Lieberman

The 2012 elections are now in the history books. With President Obama returning to face a divided—and likely gridlocked—Congress for at least the next two years, many observers expect the President to address the biggest public policy issues through the regulatory, rather than the legislative, process.

The decisions agencies make can have enormous consequences for businesses and the public. These wide-reaching effects are one reason why every administration since President Nixon’s has provided some mechanism for centralized review of agency regulations.

From: Feedstuffs

Jacqui Fatka

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has submitted a draft rule country-of-origin labeling rule to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, according to an official who works for USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service.

The World Trade Organization recently required USDA to adjust COOL requiring U.S. retailers to clearly label where meat was raised and processed. WTO said although the U.S. can require meat labeling, current COOL rules do not meet WTO standards, and the U.S. has until May 23 to bring its COOL rules into compliance.

Editor’s Note:  The following is part of our occasional focus on European regulatory review.

From: RegBlog

José Carlos Laguna de Paz

Network industries have been national monopolies for decades, so introducing competition in these sectors has been anything but easy. Yet observers may view the liberalization of electronic communications as a successful process in Europe. European Union (EU) policy abolished special and exclusive rights for the provision of networks and services, facilitating the entry of new operators who provide innovative services at lower prices. In addition, ex ante regulation and competition law enforcement have led to much more competitive markets. The degree of economic efficiency and consumer satisfaction that we have achieved would be hardly imaginable under the traditional regime of exclusive rights.

Editor’s Note:  As the construction market starts to recover from a long and serious decline, it is welcome news that OMB continues to do its job, as directed by the President, to ensure that regulations comply with applicable requirements prior to promulgation.

From: Charlestson Gazette

Tom O’Connor: Two years old, Silica Rule remains mired at OIRA

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Two years. 730 days. Thousands of workers’ lives. However you choose to look at it, that’s how long the proposed Occupational Exposure to Crystalline Silica rule has been sitting at the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). OIRA is supposed to review proposed rules within 90 days.

Editor’s Note:  In addition to transparency deficiencies, the Unified Agenda also demonstrated accuracy deficiencies.

From: Regulatory Studies Center/George Washington University

Sofie E. Miller

Last month, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a report finding that federal agencies published about 35 percent of the major rules issued between 2003 and 2010 without seeking public comment through a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). As Susan Dudley explained in a policy commentary on GAO’s report, “This means that a significant percentage of new regulations expected to have an impact of $100 million or more on the economy are given the force of law without public input. GAO finds a sharp increase in the practice of issuing a final regulation without first seeking public comment in 2009, when 40 percent of all major final rules were issued without notice and comment, compared to 26 percent in 2008.” Unfortunately, a look at the recently-released Unified Agenda indicates that this trend may be continuing, and that agencies may continue to regulate without seeking public comment.