GMW: Bush Nominates Anti-Regulatory Zealot to Head Regulatory Policy

[Guest guest]

GMW: Bush Nominates Anti-Regulatory Zealot to Head Regulatory

Policy

" GM WATCH " <info

Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:27:53 +0100

 

 

 

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

---

---

The White House has nominated Susan Dudley to become the administrator

of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs - " an obscure but

powerful office where she would have the power to gut the federal

government's very ability to protect the public. "

 

You may have thought the largely voluntary US system for the regulation

of GMOs somewhat lax, but here's what Dudley thinks, " Unscientific

fears, fanned by activists and short-sighted government policies, have

led

to a regulatory framework that singles out genetically modified crops

for greater scrutiny and even prohibition. "

---

---

Bush Nominates Anti-Regulatory Zealot to Head Regulatory Policy

OMB Watch, 8 August 2006

http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/3550/1/308?TopicID=1

 

The White House has nominated Susan Dudley, an anti-regulatory

extremist from the industry-funded Mercatus Center, to an obscure but

powerful

office where she would have the power to gut the federal government's

very ability to protect the public.

 

Dudley would become the administrator of the Office of Information and

Regulatory Affairs, an office in the White House Office of Management

and Budget with enormous authority over environmental, health, and

safety regulations.

 

<p>Dudley would replace John Graham, who left the office in February to

become dean of the RAND Graduate School. During Graham's time in

office, regulatory agencies ranging from the Occupational Health and

Safety

Administration (OSHA) to the Food and Drug Administration have seen

their policies weakened and their ability to develop new safety and

health

standards diminished.

 

Nominating Dudley to this office is a signal that the White House is

not interested in reversing course. Through numerous comments on

regulations and articles on regulatory policy, Dudley has displayed

hostility

to environmental, health and safety protections. She has opposed

important health and safety standards such as limiting arsenic in

drinking

water and installing advanced air bag technology in automobiles.

 

In her own words:

 

On Davis-Bacon: " The prevailing wage requirement does not offer net

benefits to society, but rather reflects a transfer from low-skilled and

low-wage workers to skilled and union workers . . . . There is no

economic justification for a federal role in defining construction

practices

and determining wages, as required by the Davis-Bacon Act. "

 

On OSHA regulation generally: " In the case of OSHA regulation,

empirical analysis has not found strong evidence that OSHA regulations

have had

a substantial impact on worker health and safety . . . . OSHA's

regulations are costly for the economy. According to recent estimates,

OSHA

regulations contribute nearly one-half of the total direct cost of

workplace regulations--around $41 billion per year in 2000. MSHA

regulations

cost another $7.4 billion. It is unclear whether these costs produce

commensurate benefits. Econometric studies have generally failed to find

evidence that OSHA regulations have had a significant impact on job

safety. "

 

On arsenic in the drinking water: The Clinton standards were " an

unwelcome distraction from the task of protecting the water supply. . . .

While [EPA] should share information about arsenic levels and hazards, it

should not impose its judgment, based on national average costs and

benefits, on individual communities as to how best to invest in their own

public health. "

 

On food safety: " Unscientific fears, fanned by activists and

short-sighted government policies, have led to a regulatory framework

that

singles out genetically modified crops for greater scrutiny and even

prohibition. . . . Policymakers regulating agricultural biotechnology

face

pressure from well-organized activists to constrain the new technology.

Large biotech companies do not speak out aggressively against

unscientific

policies, either because they don't dare offend the regulators on whom

their livelihood depends, or because regulations give them a

competitive advantage. "

 

Again on GM crops: " In spite of hundreds of thousands of field tests as

well as peer-reviewed research papers, no evidence indicates the

presence of any unique environmental or health risks from the products of

gene-splicing. "

 

On environmental right to know: " Informing the public about hazards in

their community is an intuitively desirable social goal. . . . However,

this does not argue that any information on chemical releases is

desirable. . . .t is important to recognize that information is

costly to

produce, and depending on how it is communicated and received, may

confuse, rather than inform. Even if we determine that information on the

release of certain chemicals has a net social value, we cannot assume

that more frequently reported information, or information on a broader

range of chemicals would be more valuable. Only when the social costs of

information are weighed against the social benefits can a determination

be made regarding what and how much information is optimal. "

On investor right to know: " Concerned that investors are not receiving

the information they need regarding the tax consequences of investing

in mutual funds, the SEC required mutual funds to report standardized

after-tax returns along with the standardized pre-tax returns they

already report. . . . The SEC's only stated criterion in developing

the rule

is that the information be deemed 'helpful' to investors in making

investment decisions. But the SEC has no way of identifying information

that meets this standard except by observing what information is brought

forth by the private sector. It has not identified any market failure

that would warrant regulatory action. "

On privacy of consumer financial information: " The implicit premise of

the rule is that individuals and firms cannot come to a mutually

satisfactory agreement as far as privacy is concerned without resort to

government assistance. Indeed, if individuals truly value their

privacy, and

firms desire to maximally satisfy their customers, then a meeting of

the minds ought to be achievable without resort to compulsory

regulations. "

On improved air bag standards: " NHTSA estimates that air bags have

reduced fatalities in frontal crashes by about 30 percent. Moreover,

judging from vehicle manufacturers' pre-regulation actions and ongoing

advertising, which lists dual air bags as a positive attribute in new

vehicles, consumers appear to prefer vehicles equipped with air bags.

These

facts, however, are not sufficient to justify federal regulation

requiring air bags. If air bags protect lives, and consumers demand

them, it is

reasonable to assume that automobile manufacturers would have installed

air bags in the absence of federal requirements to do so. "

On fuel economy: " Worst rule of 2003: The National Highway Traffic

Safety Administration corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards for

light trucks. NHTSA continues to force vehicle manufacturers to achieve

higher miles per gallon than the market would offer, or consumers would

choose, in the absence of the regulation. Absurdly, its economic model

shows large net benefits to consumers even if markets are assumed to

operate perfectly, i.e., without counting any externalities. We know this

must be false, because any regulatory constraint that forces consumers

away from their preferred choices must have negative net benefits

(i.e., make Americans worse off). "

If Dudley is confirmed, she will have the opportunity to weaken the

regulations she has spent her career criticizing, a prospect that

could be

devastating for the individuals who rely on the federal government to

meet national needs, like providing safe drinking water, responding to

global warming, or keeping workers safe on the job.

-------------------------