Regulatory Policy

Regulatory safeguards play a vital role in protecting us from hazards and ensuring that companies that pollute, make unsafe products, and create workplace hazards bear the cost of cleaning up their messes and preventing injuries and deaths. Still, the regulatory system is far from perfect: Rules take too long to develop; enforcement is often feeble; and political pressure from regulated industries has led to weak safeguards.

These systemic problems are made all the more severe by the determination of the Trump administration to undercut sensible safeguards across virtually all aspects of federal regulation. Moreover, the President and his team have taken aim at the the process by which such safeguards are developed, aiming to take a system already slanted in favor of industry profit at the expense of health, safety and the environment, and make it even less protective. For example, where critics of the use of cost-benefit analysis see a system that understates the value of safeguards and overstates the cost of implementing them -- making it difficult to adopt needed protections -- the Trump administration seeks simply to ignore benefits of safeguards, pretending they do not exist. The result is a regulatory system that fails to enforce landmark laws like the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and more.

CPR exposes and opposes efforts by opponents of sensible safeguards to undermine the regulatory system, fighting back against knee-jerk opposition to environmental, health, and safety protections. Below, see what CPR Members Scholars and staff have had to say in reports, testimony, op-eds and more. Use the search box to narrow the list.

sdd

Limiting Federal Agency Preemption: Recommendations for a New Federalism Executive Order

Type: Reports (Nov. 19, 2008)
PDF: Limiting Federal Agency Preemption: Recommendations for a New Federalism Executive Order
Download
Author(s): Thomas McGarity, Nina Mendelson, Sidney Shapiro, David Vladeck, Matt Shudtz, James Goodwin
Tags: preemption
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy

Comments on the Department of Homeland Security's Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information (Interim Rule).

Rena Steinzor's May 2004 comments on the Department of Homeland Security's Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information (Interim Rule).

Type: Letters to Agencies (May 20, 2004)
PDF: Steinzor CII Comments for DHS. Rena Steinzor's May 2004 comments on the Department of Homeland Security's Procedures for Handling Critical Infrastructure Information (Interim Rule).
Download
Author(s): Rena Steinzor, Karen Sokol
Tags: critical infrastructure
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy

April 6, 2006: CPR White Paper Proposes Innovative Solutions to Gaps in Data on Toxic Chemicals.

Type: News Releases (April 6, 2006)
PDF: April 6, 2006: CPR White Paper Proposes Innovative Solutions to Gaps in Data on Toxic Chemicals.
Download
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy

Bush's Cost-Benefit View Carries a High Price

Bush's Cost-Benefit View Carries a High Price, op-ed by Frank Ackerman and Lisa Heinzerling

Type: Op-Eds (April 26, 2004)
PDF: Bush's Cost-Benefit View Carries a High Price
Download
Author(s): Lisa Heinzerling, Frank Ackerman
Tags: OIRA cost-benefit
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy

Ossifying Ossification: Why the Information Quality Act Should Not Provide for Judicial Review

Ossifying Ossification: Why the Information Quality Act Should Not Provide for Judicial Review, by Sidney A. Shapiro, Rena Steinzor and Margaret Clune, White Paper 601, February 2006.

Type: Reports (Feb. 15, 2006)
PDF: Ossifying Ossification: Why the Information Quality Act Should Not Provide for Judicial Review, by Sidney A. Shapiro, Rena Steinzor and Margaret Clune, White Paper 601, February 2006.
Download
Author(s): Sidney Shapiro, Rena Steinzor, Margaret Giblin
Tags: Data Quality Act
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy

Is Cost-Benefit Analysis Neutral? An Analysis of the Bush Administration's Approach to Environmental, Health, and Safety Protection

Is Cost-Benefit Analysis Neutral? An Analysis of the Bush Administration's Approach to Environmental, Health, and Safety Protection, by David M. Driesen, White Paper 507, June 2005.

Type: Reports (June 15, 2005)
PDF: Is Cost-Benefit Analysis Neutral? An Analysis of the Bush Administration's Approach to Environmental, Health, and Safety Protection, by David M. Driesen, White Paper 507, June 2005.
Download
Author(s): David Driesen
Tags: cost-benefit
Categories: Regulatory Policy Regulatory Policy