Posts Tagged ‘Coalition for Sensible Safeguards’

April3

New report from Demos, U.S. PIRG highlights the damage done by regulatory “reform”

By: Rich Robinson

The people who bring you regulatory “reform” (Big Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and their cheerleaders in Congress) are hard at work trying to slow down and even halt regulatory safeguards. Now, a new report by Demos and the U.S. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) reveals that Americans’ lives, health and livelihoods would be put at risk if these so-called “reform” proposals were to become law.

The first in a series of state reports focus on Massachusetts, Ohio and Pennsylvania (with others coming soon), on how their residents would be harmed by each year of delay in the creation of three upcoming proposed bills: The “Regulations from the Executive in Need Of Scrutiny (REINS) Act”, The “Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA),” and The “Regulatory Flexibility Improvement Act (RFIA).”

According to the reports, thousands of Americans are at risk:

  • In Pennsylvania alone, for each year the government fails to update the restriction on levels of toxic soot in the air the state will face 3,890 preventable deaths and 84,539 preventable asthma attacks among children.
  • In Ohio, delaying the Affordable Care Act’s ban on health insurance companies discriminating against patients with pre- existing conditions for one year will put 65,060 newly diagnosed cancer patients at risk of being denied health insurance.
  • Allowing food processors to delay one year before using new standards from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for safe handling of produce will cause approximately 200,000 local cases of foodborne illness—more than the entire city of Worcester.

    Continue Reading

Posted in: Congress, Consumer Protection, Energy, Environment, Financial Reform, Health, Product Safety, Regulation, Uncategorized, Workplace Health & Safety0 comments

December30

2011 Look Back: The year’s best coverage on the struggle to preserve public protections

By: Rich Robinson

This past year we witnessed an unrelenting attack on public safeguards. Since the release of the infamous “Cantor Memo” (which announced House Majority Leader Eric Cantor’s attack plan), it seemed like whenever you turned on the TV news or opened your favorite fishwrap (go ahead and google that one kids) all you heard about was the GOP war on regulations.

And even though the Republican echo chamber was loud and livid, the actual truth about regulatory protections got out – a lot. As 2011 winds down, here is a look back on the best coverage on the struggle to preserve our vital safeguards.

One of the best overviews of the fight came from the article Public Citizen President Robert Weissman wrote for the October 31st edition of The Nation magazine, “The GOP’s Deregulation Obsession.”

The Huffington Post followed with interest and a few posts captured the story well:  “Republican Nonsense on Regulation” by Jonathan Weiler, Jeffrey Hollender’s “The Harms of Regulation Phobia” and Marcia G. Yerman’s “National Poll says America Wants the EPA”

The New York Times had several good articles on the year’s regulatory battles, including a highly recommended analysis by Bruce Bartlett, a former senior policy adviser in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations, “Misrepresentations, Regulations and Jobs.”

Continue Reading

Posted in: Congress, Consumer Protection, Energy, Environment, Financial Reform, Health, Product Safety, Regulation, Uncategorized, Workplace Health & Safety1 comments

December7

With REINS Act, House sends terrible message: Big Business is more important than public health, safety and financial security

By: Rich Robinson

They went and did it. The House, primarily along party lines, voted in favor of Big Business over public health and safety by passing the “Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2011.” It joins the “Regulatory Accountability Act” and the “Regulatory Flexibility Improvements Act” as a trio of devastatingly harmful deregulation bills.

The REINS Act, along with its two ugly cousins, would seriously undermine the ability of agencies to protect the public. A vast array of new health, safety, environmental, financial and other regulatory protections would be in jeopardy.

The REINS Act would allow a new Congress to block the implementation of legislation passed by a previous Congress – without actually having to repeal popular laws. It would block the enforcement of health care, financial and environmental reforms that have already been enacted.

One of the GOP goals is to drip as much molasses into the regulatory process as possible, and REINS would do that nicely. By requiring congressional approval of agency rules, it would effectively end rule making – and that’s the plan.

The Coalition for Sensible Standards, of which Public Citizen plays a leading role, outlined the damage the REINS Act would do if it became law in a story today by the Associated Press. Among other things, the bill would:

Continue Reading

Posted in: Congress, Environment, Financial Reform, Regulation, Uncategorized0 comments

November21

THIS WEEK . . . errr, NEXT WEEK! We head to the Supreme Court, plan for #J21 and prepare for Congressional attempts to repeal the 21st century!

By: Rachel Lewis

Happy Thanksgiving week everyone! It’s a short week for us (Public Citizen will be closed Thursday and Friday) but still a busy one, as we continue to build momentum for a day of action on Jan. 21 – the two-year anniversary of the U.S. "Public Citizen Lady Liberty"Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission – and prepare for several major events next week. So, don’t put your calendars away just yet!

They usually come just as you’re sitting down to eat dinner– robocalls! On Monday, Nov. 28, Public Citizen attorney Scott Nelson will argue before the U.S. Supreme Court for the second time this fall. This time, he’s contending that consumers have a right of access to the federal courts in cases under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The TCPA prohibits junk faxes and robocalls, and gives people who receive calls that violate the law the ability to sue for damages of $500 to $1,500 per violation. Nelson will argue that TCPA plaintiffs, like other plaintiffs with federal claims, should have access to the federal courts under their sweeping jurisdiction over cases that arise under federal law. The case is Mims v. Arrow Financial Services. For more information, click here.

Also next week, the GOP is once again making a run at eviscerating the regulatory system – you know, the federal system that helps keep our air and water clean, our food safe, our financial system secure, our toys lead-free and so much more . . . this is a battle we cannot afford to lose.

The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to vote on the REINS Act , a bill that would, in essence, repeal the 21st century undoing years of work and hard fought progress that has been made to keep citizens safe from industries that can, at times, be more driven by profit than the health and well-being of American citizens. REINS would take away what authority regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have and put it in the hands of Congress. After all the partisan bickering, crazy supercommittee debt ceiling nonsense and failure to come to consensus on anything but to call pizza a vegetable, do we as citizens really want Congress to take the “reins” (bad pun, intended!), allowing lawmakers the power of giving thumbs up or down on any new regulations?!

Then, there is the Regulatory Accountability Act, another absolute misnomer that would serve to create even more hurdles than there already are to the rulemaking process (and there are A LOT of hurdles, just look at how many lives were lost while regulators tried to get through rules for cranes used on construction sites). The Regulatory Accountability Act calls for all rules to be made based on cost and has provisions that would undermine decision-making based on science.

Continue Reading

Posted in: Activism, Uncategorized0 comments

November17

New Paper by the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards Exposes the Dangers of the Regulatory Accountability Act

By: Rich Robinson

The Big Business attack on public safeguards will get a little more intense in the coming days, when the House votes on a couple of particularly treacherous deregulatory bills aimed at dumping a barrel of molasses into the rulemaking process.

In this space I’ve previously written about the REINS Act, the bill that would require congressional approval of all major rules within 70 days. This ludicrous provision (as if Congress can get anything done in 70 days) is designed to prevent any rules from seeing the light of day. The other blunt object being used against public protections is the Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA), a cynical attempt by the supporters of Big Business to cripple the federal regulatory process. Both of these odious measures will be up for votes in the House soon.

The RAA is deceptively presented as a “reform” to the rulemaking process, but don’t be fooled. The bill would add more delays to an already exhaustive process and set an even higher bar than currently exists for issuing needed protections. In effect, the RAA would hamstring all rulemaking agencies and squander their resources, placing the American people in harm’s way.

A clarion call is being issued by the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards (of which Public Citizen plays a leading role) with its new paper, Impacts of the Regulatory Accountability Act: Overturning 65 Years of Law and Leaving Americans Less Protected. It’s a thorough look into the bill and it reveals several examples of how it would affect the rulemaking process. The RAA would:

• Make the “least costly” rule the default choice, instead of promoting the public good
• Super-mandate cost-benefit analysis even when it would be misapplied
• Shift to “formal” rulemaking processes that thwart appropriate give and take
• Eliminate hybrid rulemaking that is often the best approach
• Allow judicial review of all agency judgments, undermining scientific findings

Agencies already have had some ridiculous experiences with some of these procedures and Big Business has effectively used them to throw a monkey wrench into a proposed rule it didn’t like. A classic example of this is the Food and Drug Administration’s “peanut butter” rule, which was developed several decades ago.

Continue Reading

Posted in: Congress, Consumer Protection, Energy, Environment, Financial Reform, Product Safety, Regulation, Uncategorized, Workplace Health & Safety27 comments

© Copyright . All Rights Reserved.