Steinzor in The Hill: Debunking the Anti-Regulatory's Case on Over-Regulation
CPR President Rena Steinzor had an op-ed in The Hill yesterday, dismantling right wing arguments about "excessive" regulation, and shaming the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for sitting on rules long past their required deadlines.
Noting just some of the now-taken-for-granted results of safeguards that were regulated into existence -- things like clean tap water, safe and effective drugs, and safety belts in automobiles, she points out that opponents of regulation are working hard to turn back the clock, producing proposal after proposal to further hamstring enforcement of laws like the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and more. She dismisses the right wing's argument that there's some sort of tsunami of regulation coming from the Obama Administration, noting that fewer regs were adopted in 2012 than in any single year of the Bush Administration. And this year's pace is even slower. She continues:
Don't get me wrong, I wish it were otherwise. In many cases, rules to implement laws passed by Congress languish for years, pinned down by intense lobbying by industry and its allies. That's the case with a number of rules required under …
The tagline that the producers of Food, Inc. are using to promote their Academy Award-winning documentary is “You’ll never look at dinner the same way.” They’re quite right. The film airs on many PBS stations this evening (and on others throughout the course of the next week). See for yourself.
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 US endangered species under a predecessor to the current Endangered Species Act. Its population rebounded after DDT was banned in 1972. By 1985, the pelican had recovered enough to justify delisting along the Atlantic coast. Now the Service has determined that populations are also stable off the Gulf and Pacific Coasts, such that the species as a whole no longer needs the protection of the ESA. Lest that judgment be wrong, the Act requires that the Service monitor the pelican’s status for at least five years after delisting.
The success of the …
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 US endangered species under a predecessor to the current Endangered Species Act. Its population rebounded after DDT was banned in 1972. By 1985, the pelican had recovered enough to justify delisting along the Atlantic coast. Now the Service has determined that populations are also stable off the Gulf and Pacific Coasts, such that the species as a whole no longer needs the protection of the ESA. Lest that judgment be wrong, the Act requires that the Service monitor the pelican’s st
atus for at least five years after delisting.
The success of …
U.S. EPA plans to conduct fewer in-person inspections and bring fewer cases against industrial rule-breakers over the next five years, the agency said in a recent document outlining its goals.
The agency aims to carry out 30 percent fewer inspections and evaluations than the past five years. It will seek to initiate 40 percent fewer civil cases, and it will keep criminal goals mostly static with 2012.
Officials have hinted at this shift in the past, but last month, it showed up in writing, when the agency released its draft strategic plan for 2014 through 2018. The 86-page document lays out all the expected goals -- address climate change, prevent pollution, protect waters -- with some new ideas for accomplishing them.
When it comes to enforcement, the agency wants to target the biggest problems first, which it argues will mean a decrease over time in "conventional performance measures …
Has the U.S. "exported" its carbon emissions to China by relying on China to manufacture so many of our goods? There seems to be growing support for the idea that carbon emissions should be tied to consumption of goods rather than their manufacture, as the NY Times reported recently. There is a grain of truth to the idea. But consumer responsibility should be considered secondary. The primary responsibility rests with producers.
Most of the debate has been about climate change. But it may be easier to think through the issue in a less contentious context. Consider the problem of water pollution in the Mississippi River, which results in the infamous dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. Agricultural runoff in the Midwest is a big part of the problem. A significant portion of the U.S. corn and soybean crops are exported to Asia.
Does this …
