Regulatory Transactions

From:  Association of Corporate Counsel

Matthew Deffebach/Haynes and Boone LLP

Editor’s Note:  The quality of the regulatory review process is far more important than it’s timeliness.  NGOs which favor activity over careful consideration of the impacts of that activity push the country down an economically perilous path.  After all, the public will have to live with the burden of the regulations long after regulators and activists have moved on to other projects.

From: The Hill’s Congress Blog

By Scott Slesinger

An important question before Congress this week: Should the regulatory process for projects that have major impacts on the environment be speeded up or slowed down?

From: RegBlog

David Thaw

Cybersecurity is a “hot topic” in U.S. politics.  The White House issued an Executive Order earlier this year, the Department of Defense classified cyberspace as a war domain, Congress considered multiple pieces of legislation, and both the popular and trade press continue to report on numerous high profile incidents both in government and the private sector.  Some leading experts have called for comprehensive cybersecurity regulation.

From: LawyersAndSettlements.com

By Jane Mundy

Sacramento, CA: The Coalition for Sensible Safeguards (CSS) recently reported (June 2013) on a proposal to expand the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to cover home healthcare workers, a change that has been under the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for the past two years. This new rule would have a major impact regarding California overtime.

In December 2011, the Obama administration proposed regulations to give the nation’s nearly two million homecare workers minimum wage and overtime protections – workers who have been exempt from both protections. (A decision is expected within the next few months.)

Editor’s Note:  Any FDA policies which result in Regulation by Litigation being used to resolve safety issues would be directly contrary to 3 mandates in the President’s Executive Order 13563, Improviding Regulation and Regulatory Review, which states that: 1) regulations “must be based on the best available science;” 2) regulations “must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas;” and 3) regulations “must promote predictability and reduce uncertainty….”  By contrast to the Executive Order’s requirements, regulations which encourage litigation place science secondary to the vagaries of tort litigation, exclude the public participation in crucuial proceedings, and turn the outcome of the regulatory process into a litigious crapshoot.

From: American Action Forum

Red Tape Challenges to America’s Veterans

Sam Batkins

Editor’s Note:  The correct answer to how OMB should treat all of EPA’s planned actions is by acting a watchdog demanding scrupulous compliance with President Obama’s Executive Orders on regulatory review and with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act and the procedureal and substantive requirements of the Data Quality Act and implementing guidance.  With respect to PRA compliance, OMB should encourage EPA to make full use of the law’s public consultation processes.

From: Climate Science Watch