Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

What We’ll Look For in the Obama Administration’s Forthcoming Executive Order on Regulatory Process

The Obama Administration is expected to issue revisions to Executive Order 12,866, which specifies how the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) supervises federal regulatory agencies as they develop regulations to protect health, safety, the environment, and more (see the full comments on the matter submitted by CPR's board members in March).

CPR President Rena Steinzor and Board Member Rob Glicksman have issued a backgrounder on the coming Executive Order -- explaining the context and setting out six specific criteria on which to judge the Order. They are:

  1. Does the new EO continue to require agencies to justify proposed rules by quantifying “benefits” in dollar terms only – thus inviting agencies to ignore benefits that defy such monetization?
  2. Does the new EO continue to apply a “discount rate” to benefits of regulatory protections that won’t be realized for several years to come? And if it does apply a discount rate, is it set at the current rate of 7 percent, a number so high that future benefits from, for example, efforts to slow climate change essentially drop out of the equation after a couple of decades?
  3. Does the new EO explicitly disavow the “senior death discount” or other versions of lowering the value of a year of life if people are sick or handicapped?
  4. Does the new EO embrace – and to what extent – Sunstein’s attachment to “behavioral economics”? In particular, does it substitute warnings to citizens about potential harms for actual regulatory protection from harms? And does it rely on “willingness to pay” studies that peg the “benefits” of regulation to suspect data on how much people say, in the abstract, they are willing to pay to avoid certain harms.
  5. Does the new EO preserve OIRA’s power to “return” proposed regulations it does not like to agencies for time-consuming additional evaluation rather than simply advise agency heads that it disagrees with their judgments?
  6. Does the new EO impose transparency on OIRA’s activities, most significantly by ending OIRA’s practice of forcing regulatory agencies to meet with it behind closed doors and using those meetings to kill ideas for proposed regulations even before they are made public?

We'll have more, of course, when the Order is issued.

Showing 2,822 results

Ben Somberg | November 23, 2009

What We’ll Look For in the Obama Administration’s Forthcoming Executive Order on Regulatory Process

The Obama Administration is expected to issue revisions to Executive Order 12,866, which specifies how the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) supervises federal regulatory agencies as they develop regulations to protect health, safety, the environment, and more (see the full comments on the matter submitted by CPR's board members in March). CPR […]

Joel A. Mintz | November 20, 2009

Is It Time To Depoliticize EPA’s Regional Administrators?

As it nears the close of its first year in office, the Obama Administration has thus far failed to name half of the regional administrators for its ten regional offices of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); and it was only on November 5th that it named those five officials. The reason for the lengthy […]

Ben Somberg | November 19, 2009

Administration’s Announcement on Mountaintop Removal Mining — In Perspective

“Interior increases oversight of mountaintop mining” trumpets the AP, and “U.S. boosts coal mining oversight to fight pollution” says Reuters. That’s in response to an announcement from Interior on Wednesday. But on Coal Tattoo, and from NRDC and Sierra Club, one learns of a pretty different story. Says NRDC’s Rob Perks: Why in the world […]

Rena Steinzor | November 19, 2009

Sunstein Watch: OMB Says it Will Leave EDSP to the EPA Experts

On Monday, OMB Director Peter Orszag sent a letter to Rep. Ed Markey, responding to Congressman Markey’s concerns about OMB’s involvement in EPA’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Orszag’s letter — released by Markey's office Wednesday — explains, in no uncertain terms, that OMB is done meddling in EPA’s scientific determinations about endocrine-disrupting chemicals. It’s a […]

Yee Huang | November 18, 2009

Update: Judge Approves Settlement on Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Florida

A few months ago, I wrote about a landmark agreement by the EPA to set numeric, statewide nutrient pollution limits  — the first of its kind in the United States. Florida, like most states, has qualitative nutrient pollution limits, which are written in terms such as, “in no case shall nutrient concentrations of body of […]

Yee Huang | November 13, 2009

The Importance of Being Earnest: Nutrient Trading in the Chesapeake Bay

In October, Senator Ben Cardin (D.-Md.) introduced the “Chesapeake Clean Water and Ecosystem Restoration Act of 2009,” signaling the beginning of a new era of federal commitment to Bay restoration. The legislation is a tremendous step in the right direction, and it includes many elements to help make the Bay Program and the Bay-wide Total Daily […]

Holly Doremus | November 12, 2009

Brown Pelican Dis-Endangered

This posting is reprinted, by permission from Legal Planet. The Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday announced some very good news — the brown pelican will soon be removed from the list of endangered and threatened species. This enormous fish-eating bird has been protected since 1970, when it was included on the very first list of […]

Sidney A. Shapiro | November 12, 2009

Defective: Toyota Cars and Automobile Regulation

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently chastised the Toyota Motor Company for claiming that no defect existed in its cars, even while recalling 3.8 million of them. Toyota instituted the recall one month after a Lexus sedan suddenly accelerated out of control killing four people near San Diego. When Toyota blamed the problem on improperly […]

James Goodwin | November 11, 2009

Like Christmas Shopping Season, the Battle Over Rules at OIRA Begins Earlier and Earlier Every Year

When the Electric Power Research Institute (ERPI)—the research arm of the U.S. power industry—met with OIRA last month to discuss the various “beneficial uses” of spent coal ash from power plants, their timing was impeccable.  Or so it would seem.  On the day of the meeting, October 16, EPA submitted for OIRA review its pre-rule […]