At Small Business Hearing, CPR's Ristino Will Connect the Dots between Strong Safeguards and Strong Small Farms

by James Goodwin | June 21, 2018

This morning, CPR Member Scholar and Vermont Law School Professor Laurie Ristino will testify at a hearing before the Subcommittee on Agriculture, Energy, and Trade of the House Small Business Committee. The majority's not-so-subtle objective for the hearing is to apply familiar conservative talking points against federal regulations to the specific context of small farms. 

In contrast to the subcommittee majority's three witnesses, all of whom represent industry trade associations that have strongly criticized environmental and other regulations in the past, Ristino's testimony offers a fuller account of the relationship between regulatory safeguards and the economic health of small and mid-sized farms. Indeed, in her testimony, Ristino effectively makes the case that a robust system of environmental, food safety, and worker protections help to provide fertile ground in which small and mid-sized farms can thrive. 

We can expect the majority and its three witnesses to spend much of the hearing focused on a not-so-skeptical tallying of the "costs" side of the ledger. Fortunately, Ristino will be there to remind the subcommittee about the myriad benefits that regulations generate. Her testimony does this by making the following three points: 

  1. Regulations impacting agriculture deliver critical public benefits in the form of contaminant-free food, safer workplaces for agricultural workers, and stronger environmental protections.
     
  2. Strong regulations can help promote economic growth for small farmers by creating new markets and spurring innovation.
     
  3. To help ...

CPR's Heinzerling to House Small Business Committee: Trump's Assault on Safeguards Nothing to Celebrate

by James Goodwin | March 07, 2018
Later this morning, CPR Member Scholar and Georgetown Law Professor Lisa Heinzerling will testify before the House Small Business Committee at a hearing that appears to be aimed at reveling in the Trump administration's assault on regulatory safeguards. In her testimony, Professor Heinzerling will explain why the celebratory mirth and merriment from the committee's majority members and their invited witnesses is misplaced and most likely premature.  As Heinzerling will point out, the major motivating force behind the Trump administration's assault is ...

Crain and Crain are Back, and This Time They're Working for the National Association of Manufacturers

by James Goodwin | September 09, 2014
Having thoroughly tarnished their own reputations as well as that of the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) Office of Advocacy, economists W. Mark Crain and Nicole V. Crain are now preparing to make the big leap from thoroughly discredited academics to straight up shills for corporate lobbyists working to undermine public protections.  The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), an industry trade group that vehemently opposes such policies as cleaning up air pollution and improving worker safety, yesterday announced that it will ...

Presidential Appointee at SBA Maligns OSHA's Industrial Noise Proposal; Claims Ear Plugs "Solve" the Problem

by Sidney Shapiro | April 15, 2011
Congress charged the Office of Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) with the job of representing the interests of small business before regulatory agencies, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). As an agency of the federal government, it has an obligation to taxpayers to get its facts straight before it speaks. Lately, it has ignored this basic obligation, most notably sponsoring a study that used flawed methodology to claim that regulations impose $1.75 trillion in costs every ...

SBA Defends Peer Review Process on Regs Study; ‘Offered the Study for Review’ to Experts Beyond the Two Who Actually Responded

by Ben Somberg | April 06, 2011
When the U.S. Small Business Administration issued a study last September claiming regulations cost the U.S. economy $1.75 Trillion in a single year, the agency trumpeted that the "report was peer reviewed consistent with the Office of Advocacy’s data quality guidelines." But the peer review file included with the study was embarrassingly meager -- comments from all of two individuals. The authors, economists Nicole Crain and Mark Crain, ignored a fundamental criticism raised by one of the two reviewers that ...

Deconstructing Regulatory Science

Wagner | Jun 19, 2018 | Regulatory Policy

Agency U-Turns

Farber | Jun 18, 2018 | Regulatory Policy

Laying Down the Law on Rule Delays

Heinzerling | Jun 14, 2018 | Regulatory Policy

The Center for Progressive Reform

455 Massachusetts Ave., NW, #150-513
Washington, DC 20001
info@progressivereform.org
202.747.0698

© Center for Progressive Reform, 2015