Bush Directive Increases Sway on Regulation

uscitizen

Villified User
Bush Directive Increases Sway on Regulation
Doug Mills/The New York Times

By ROBERT PEAR
Published: January 30, 2007

WASHINGTON, Jan. 29 — President Bush has signed a directive that gives the White House much greater control over the rules and policy statements that the government develops to protect public health, safety, the environment, civil rights and privacy.

In an executive order published last week in the Federal Register, Mr. Bush said that each agency must have a regulatory policy office run by a political appointee, to supervise the development of rules and documents providing guidance to regulated industries. The White House will thus have a gatekeeper in each agency to analyze the costs and the benefits of new rules and to make sure the agencies carry out the president’s priorities.

This strengthens the hand of the White House in shaping rules that have, in the past, often been generated by civil servants and scientific experts. It suggests that the administration still has ways to exert its power after the takeover of Congress by the Democrats.

The White House said the executive order was not meant to rein in any one agency. But business executives and consumer advocates said the administration was particularly concerned about rules and guidance issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

In an interview on Monday, Jeffrey A. Rosen, general counsel at the White House Office of Management and Budget, said, “This is a classic good-government measure that will make federal agencies more open and accountable.”

Business groups welcomed the executive order, saying it had the potential to reduce what they saw as the burden of federal regulations. This burden is of great concern to many groups, including small businesses, that have given strong political and financial backing to Mr. Bush.

Consumer, labor and environmental groups denounced the executive order, saying it gave too much control to the White House and would hinder agencies’ efforts to protect the public.

Typically, agencies issue regulations under authority granted to them in laws enacted by Congress. In many cases, the statute does not say precisely what agencies should do, giving them considerable latitude in interpreting the law and developing regulations.

The directive issued by Mr. Bush says that, in deciding whether to issue regulations, federal agencies must identify “the specific market failure” or problem that justifies government intervention.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/30/washington/30rules.html?_r=2&ei=5094&en=f7bdc9f4cbb28c31&hp=&ex=1170133200&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1170168595-VUbe6DbQTTkeLCAYXZ4aAA
 
Sounds fine to me.

>The directive issued by Mr. Bush says that, in deciding whether to issue regulations, federal agencies must identify “the specific market failure” or problem that justifies government intervention
 
Sounds fine to me.

>The directive issued by Mr. Bush says that, in deciding whether to issue regulations, federal agencies must identify “the specific market failure” or problem that justifies government intervention
That's because you're a partisan drone who is comfortable with politicizing anything . . . so long as your party's in power.

Let's see how you feel when Hillary Clinton is writing all of the government health advisories.

:D
 
Hmm, yes if this survives it will carry over to the next president, which in all likelyhood will not be a Republican.
 
No where did I say this only pretained to Bush. Get a grip boys. I think the departments need to explain themselves and what they do. NO matter who is in charge of the Exective Branch.
 
Back
Top