Scholar argues that despite progressive roots, U.S. transparency laws have taken an anti-government focus.
A real EPA transparency rule should be grounded in scientific practices, not constituency interests.
Public access to data behind regulations should not be a political question.
Proposed limits to EPA’s consideration of scientific data threaten timely, sound policymaking.
Scholars and regulatory commentators debate the significance of EPA’s recently proposed “transparency” rule.
When a regulation’s benefits exceed its costs, simplicity and interdisciplinary processes are essential to reducing capture.
Deadline suits may offer key opportunity to even the playing field in regulatory agenda-setting.
Sue and settle tactics may influence agency behavior and rulemaking.
The Regulatory Review post sparks further debate over recent bill to curb negotiated agreements about rulemaking.
Regulatory agencies should do more to make information about proposed rules more accessible.
Arizona should end its five-year moratorium on new regulations.
Latest ACUS recommendations seek to promote a more open and efficient government.