OIRA Watch

In an earlier post we described the fact that the numerous groups that seek relief from OIRA seldom support it when the organization is criticized for simply doing its job.

Now the retiring long term President of the Senior Executives Association makes a similar point  regarding the  protection of  the integrity of the Senior Executive Service.  More specifically Carol Bonosaro states upon her retirement:

I have only one regret and that is, that I could never succeed in getting the vast majority of the career executive corps to  support SEA.

She also includes a gem of a quote  from a former President:

The Hill       JP Updates       Senator Lieberman

2015

Publisher’s Note: Each year hundreds of affected parties, be they NGO’s, members of the regulated community, or Congressional staff, make their way to OIRA to plead their case on a particular rulemaking. In OIRA’s thirty-five years of existence how many times have these same parties acted in a selfless manner to protect that privilege by devoting the necessary resources to improve OIRA’s operation? Here is both an opportunity for, and a public recognition of, such efforts. [ November, 2015]

Publisher’s Note:  The following book highlights the lasting impact the Nixon Administration had on the initiation of centralized regulatory review:

Although the idea of a centralized review of regulations focused on cost-benefit analysis had originated with Army Corps of Engineers construction projects during the Johnson administration and expanded informally to include OMB oversight over environmental rules under Nixon, Ford’s executive order formalized the concept for the first time and fundamentally reframed policy debates over regulation. 26

26  Jim Tozzi, “OIRA Formative Years: The Historical Record of Centralized Regulatory Review Preceding OIRA’s Founding,” Administrative Law Review 63 (Special Edition 2011): 37–69.

Publishers Note ( November 2015)

 What follows is an  article written by a student for a law review that demonstrates the need for an OIRA Teaching Module for use in the nation’s leading law schools.

Rebecca Strauss

October 6, 2015

Director, Renewing America Publications

The Council on Foreign Relations.

Ms. Strauss:

Mr. Reeve Bull of the Administrative Conference of the US, in a forthcoming publication, highlighted your very deep insights into federal regulatory policy as contained in the Council Report.

I was particularly impressed with the following statements at the beginning of your report:

“In particular, the U.S. regulatory management system, or the way in which federal regulations are designed, could be improved. The system has changed little since the early 1980s and focuses almost exclusively on cost-benefit analysis before regulations are put into place, instead of in hindsight when it is clearer whether a regulation is working.”

At its onset OIRA was the largest organization in OMB; even larger than the ever present BRD (Budget Review Division) responsible for assembling the federal budget. Initially OIRA had in the neighborhood a staff of 90 and had an entire floor of the New Executive Office Building. Compare these stats with the fact that OIRA now has a staff of around fifty. In no instance has the staff reductions been made by the Congress; in all instances they were imposed by the Director of OMB in both Democratic and Republican Administrations. This is not to suggest that Congress has not tried to cut OIRA’s budget because OIRA refused to support a pet project of an influential member.

The concept—but not the execution—of centralized regulatory review is the product of an academician; why nearly five decades after its birth are a number of legal academicians still flailing over its execution?

Editor’s Note: It is a well established principle that documents sent to OIRA are part of the deliberative process and therefore need not be released to the Congress. Administration’s of both parties have made this point repeatedly and it has withstood judicial review.

From: The Hill

Timothy Cama

House Republicans moved Tuesday to force the Obama administration to disclose certain documents related to the development of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) major water jurisdiction rule.

The House Oversight Committee sent a subpoena on the rule to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which is responsible for reviewing all major federal regulations before they are issued.

Ms. Janna Rezaee has written a dissertation on OIRA which differs remarkably from many  of the previous articles on the institution. More specifically a number of the studies to date emphasize  OIRA’s role as  policing the rulemaking process for ineffective rules. In this instance, however, the author focuses on OIRA’s role as supporting (“subsidizing”) the policies of the Presidency.

A major conclusion is:

CMS’s Five-Star Quality Rating System for Part C and D Medicare is laudible concept for using informed consumer choice rather than command-and-control regulation to improve the healthcare market. However, because the Star Rating System is now used to determine bonuses, rebates, and eligibility, CMS is statutorily required to implement the ratings through Federal Register notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings.

In the letter to CMS attached here, the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness explains the deficiencies in how the ratings were developed. CRE concludes that CMS should

1. Follow Federal Register notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings for the star ratings programs.