Purpose

This independent blog collects news about projects or achievements in regulatory reform / better regulation. It is edited by Charles H. Montin. All opinions expressed are given on a personal basis.
Background on regulatory quality, see "Archive" tab. To be regularly informed or share your news, join the Smart Regulation Group on LinkedIn: 1,300 members, or register as follower.

02 November 2011

Extra red tape on rule making? The new RAA (US)

An interesting discussion in the US, on the same theme as the previous post (accountability of regulators) is provided by a recent post on "the Hill" (US Congress Blog) under the polemic title: "Regulatory reform good for multinationals, yet bad for you."
The Regulatory Accountability Act of 2011 (RAA), a bipartisan bill introduced in the House and Senate, updates rules on how Federal agencies analyze costs and benefits, with detailed procedures for agencies promulgating regulations that are projected to have a minimum effect of at least $100 million on the United States economy.
The vice-chair of the American Sustainable Business Council questions the proposed legislation. It "will likely dramatically drive up the cost of almost every rule-making process and budget of a federal agency. Second, federally elected officials will be stripped of their ability to responsibly lead our country. And third, the RAA is a highway to never-ending lawsuits by special interests against the federal government.
The RAA is designed to micromanage every federal agency in its efforts to create rules necessary to carry out legislation passed by Congress.
By doing so, it turns over 60 years of effective regulation promulgation under the Administration Procedures Act into a protracted process that will stretch the time needed for rule-making into decades. Federal agency budgets will need to be expanded by hundreds of billions of dollars to comply with the RAA and perform their usual functions of protecting the public and small businesses from unsafe products and practices."
A similarly critical view is taken by OMB Watch, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization.
For a more balanced view, see RegBlog post reporting the most recent hearing in the House (Judiciary Committee).

No comments:

Post a Comment