From: BNA/Daily Report for Executives
You’ll see us in September and we’re bringing recommendations.
***
And it’s a surprising message from the pair, who head the bipartisan Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking, a 15-member panel created to bring together experts in social policy, data and privacy to figure out how to make federal data on spending and tax programs more useful and accessible.
From: Jim Tozzi, Public Member
***
With respect to institutional residency, consideration should be given to housing Regulations.gov in an existing federal agency which has a mandate far broader than the mere issuance of regulations but instead one whose primary mission is the compilation and dissemination of relevant regulatory information to the public and stakeholders. One agency that might be home to Regulations.gov is the Office of the Federal Register. The Office of the Federal Register has an extensive database on regulatory actions which is constantly increasing and which is under constant change to make the attendant work product more valuable to its readers. The aforementioned databases should be incorporated into Regulations.gov but presently such a wish is a distant hope at best.
From: Poltico
From: Resources For the Future
Marcus Peacock, currently serving as special advisor to US Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney, appeared at RFF to discuss President Trump’s recent executive orders on regulatory policy. Mr. Peacock has written extensively on regulatory policy, including on concepts such as a regulatory budget and a two-for-one regulatory requirement.
He has a long career in public service and has held a number of posts in the federal executive branch, including deputy administrator at the US Environmental Protection Agency and associate director at the Office of Management and Budget. Mr. Peacock previously served as a staff director in both the House and Senate and worked for the Pew Charitable Trusts as well as an environmental consulting firm.
From: Marketplace
By
***
If it sounds familiar, Trump has imposed his own regulatory freeze. And like Trump, Reagan supported EPA budget cuts to boost defense spending.
“If you don’t want a lot of regulations, don’t hire a lot of regulators,” said Jim Tozzi. . . who oversaw the EPA budget in the early 1980s at the Office of Management and Budget. “So I held them down. And during that point in time, we had a lean and mean agency.”
From: Fresno Bee
President Donald Trump’s emphasis on cost-benefit analysis is both welcome and hugely important. Some regulations impose significant costs, and the private sector really doesn’t like them. But they also create significant benefits, by helping consumers save money, preventing illness and saving lives. It would be a mistake, and it could be a tragedy, to repeal them.
***
From: FederalNewsRadio.com
By Tom Temin
***
The President has ordered into place a new approach to regulation, asking for retirement of two for every one rule an agency proposes to issue. Regulatory reform might be sound public policy, but in reality nothing will get done without the people in place to continuously push this agenda at the agencies. The White House will need a fully functioning Office Regulatory Affairs. The OIRA administrator requires Senate confirmation, so there’s that challenge. But right now OIRA doesn’t even have a website.
From: Notice & Comment | A Blog from the Yale Journal on Regulation and the ABA Section of Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice
by Chris Walker
On March 2, 2017, the Center for the Study of the Administrative State is hosting a public policy conference on the Hill entitled The Time for Regulatory Reform in Congress. The Center’s director Neomi Rao and I have organized this event, and it should be a lot of fun. It’s free, with food, so register here.
In the meantime, if you’re interested in exploring regulatory reform legislation pending in the current Congress, check out the latest summary released by the Administrative Conference of the United States here.
From: Penn Program on Regulation & Brookings Institution, Center on Regulation and Markets
Brookings Institution
Saul/Zilka Room
1775 Massachusetts Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20036
9:00 AM -10:30 AM
Regulation today evokes much controversy and discontent. In the UK, Brexit signaled a major public backlash against regulations imposed by the European Union. In the United States, Donald Trump won the presidency having vowed to eliminate as many as 75 percent of federal regulations. Given the intense focus on the quality and legitimacy of government regulation around the world, how can those entrusted to devise and implement regulations best achieve success? How can they balance the goals of improving health, safety, financial protection, and economic well-being through government oversight without imposing excessive costs on consumers and businesses and without impeding innovation and economic growth?
From: Inside EPA
Dawn Reeves
***
Another group supporting this idea is the Center for Regulatory Effectiveness (CRE), which affirms Gaziano’s interpretation in a blog post responding to the Journal article. “If implemented the aforementioned use of the CRA will result in a game-changing approach to the retrospective review of regulations.” CRE also notes that it notified lawmakers in 2010 that EPA failed to submit its 2009 EDSP regulation and that it was not in effect. EPA later submitted the report, a CRE source says.
***
