This morning, CPR President and Loyola University, New Orleans, Law Professor Robert R.M. Verchick testifies at a hearing convened by the Senate Budget Committee to examine a dangerous regulatory policy proposal known as “regulatory budgeting.”
As he explains in his testimony, regulatory budgeting represents a stark departure from the traditional focus of regulatory policy discussions, which have long been concerned with improving the effectiveness—or quality—of regulatory decision-making. Regulatory budgeting, by contrast, makes the total number—or quantity—of regulations the primary focus, relegating concerns of individual regulatory quality to a matter of secondary importance.
Regulatory budgeting seeks to impose an arbitrary cap on total regulatory costs. According to one version, agencies would get an annual regulatory budget—much like their appropriations budget—which would constrain how many new regulations the agency could implement during the covered time period. Agencies could seek to exceed that budget, but they would need to first remove existing regulations that impose a cost that is greater than or equal to the new regulation. A second version would simply require agencies to remove existing regulations any time they wish to institute a new one — what many have referred to as a “one in, one out” proposition.
Such a simple-minded system is sure to produce absurd results. For example, it would almost certainly prevent agencies from issuing effective regulations that make society better off, simply because there is no space available under the applicable regulatory cap. The cold hard logic of the cap would trump the public interest.
Verchick’s testimony also explains how regulatory budgeting risks leaving the public and the environment inadequately protected, especially against new and emerging threats. He notes:
But as we face a future in which deep-water drilling, nanomaterials, and even driverless cars become commonplace, better protections—not fewer ones—are what we actually need. Rationing public goods like health, safety, and security for the benefit of a narrow class of commercial interests is the very opposite of what a virtuous and effective government should be doing.
Verchick’s testimony provides a comprehensive condemnation of regulatory budgeting. It concludes by reasserting the importance of maintaining the traditional focus of regulatory policy debates on ways to improve the quality of agency regulations. To this end, Verchick offers several recommendations for steps Congress and the agencies can take to improve the ability of the regulatory system to produce higher quality regulations.
For more about the flaws with regulatory budgeting in general and with the “pay-go” version in particular, see this 2012 CPR report.
Showing 2,834 results
James Goodwin | December 9, 2015
This morning, CPR President and Loyola University, New Orleans, Law Professor Robert R.M. Verchick testifies at a hearing convened by the Senate Budget Committee to examine a dangerous regulatory policy proposal known as “regulatory budgeting.” As he explains in his testimony, regulatory budgeting represents a stark departure from the traditional focus of regulatory policy discussions, […]
| December 9, 2015
Here at the UN climate summit is Paris, negotiators are hashing out the new meaning of an old term: common but differentiated responsibility (CBDR). CBDR has been a bedrock principle of climate negotiations since 1992. It was the basis for dividing the world into two camps: 37 developed nations that had binding greenhouse gas emissions […]
Mollie Rosenzweig | December 7, 2015
If you’ve come across one of the ads, newspaper stories, or opinion pieces from Chuck Norris in the past week warning you about frankenfish, you can thank the FDA. In mid-November, the FDA made history by approving the first genetically engineered (GE) animal for human consumption, Atlantic salmon from the company AquaBounty. Not only has the approval process […]
| December 4, 2015
Politicians are famous for reneging on, or conveniently ignoring, campaign pledges and other promises. In some cases, politicians put themselves in untenable positions, such as when they offer conflicting promises to different interest groups. This is when it becomes easy to see what an elected official’s true priorities are. Governor Hogan proclaimed that he would […]
Rena Steinzor | December 3, 2015
Justice was done today by a hard-working jury in West Virginia that convicted Don Blankenship of conspiracy to obstruct federal mine safety rules. This conspiracy was the primary cause of an enormous explosion that killed 29 men in the worst mine disaster in 40 years. Although the jury was not presented with the question of […]
James Goodwin | December 2, 2015
In a post last week, I noted that, over the last year, the Obama Administration has finalized all or part of several of the 13 regulatory actions highlighted in a 2014 Center for Progressive Reform report challenging the President to focus renewed energy during the remainder of his term on securing critical new protections for people and the […]
Robert Verchick | December 1, 2015
In August I commemorated the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina by pedaling along the self-guided “Levee Disaster Bike Tour.” I began beneath the muscular oaks along New Orleans’ Bayou St. John and threaded my way around potholes and waterfowl to pay my respects at three prominent levee-breach sites. The ride gave me a chance to reflect […]
James Goodwin | November 24, 2015
From the moment they secured majorities in both chambers, congressional Republicans have made no secret of their intention to launch an all-out, guerilla warfare-style campaign against the federal government — and even the very notion of governance itself. Accordingly, they have pursued a strategy of salt-the-earth sabotage designed to spread like a communicable disease the […]
Katie Tracy | November 23, 2015
Late last week, the White House released its fall 2015 Unified Agenda—the semi-annual report on regulations under development or review by each federal agency. As usual, and therefore of little surprise, this latest agenda spells delay for a laundry list of critical safeguards at several agencies. According to CPR senior analyst James Goodwin’s review of the regulatory […]