 |
 |
   Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 Last year there wasn�t a single fatal airline accident in the developed world. So why is the U.S. health care system still accidently killing hundreds of thousands? The answer is a lack of transparency.
 Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
|
   |
|
|
May 13, 2010
REGULATIONS I CAN BELIEVE IN.... When considering the kind of changes we've seen between this administration and the last, we tend to think about economic, national security, legal, and social policy. More generally, we might also think about the shift away from corruption, incompetence, and mismanagement. But one of the most dramatic changes is one that often goes overlooked: "A new age of regulation is well under way in Washington."
Industry leaders are complaining, a development that is neither surprising nor compelling. As the FDA gets stronger, after being gutted under the Bush administration, it's to be expected that industries are going to lament new burdens. But after a little too much "e. coli conservatism," I much prefer the new-and-improved way. I do wish this area of public policy was more appreciated, though. It's the kind of detail few Americans consider before voting, but when a president takes office, he/she does more than just become the head of the White House and a political party; he/she also leads a large federal bureaucracy with vast regulatory power. Over the last three decades, through Republican administrations, that regulatory power was deliberately stunted, favoring business interests over consumer interests. The bureaucracy has some discretion over which laws are enforced more vigorously, and the Bush administration, for example, chose a lax attitude when it came to consumer and worker protections. Obama, in contrast, is using the executive branch in a very different, more progressive fashion, emphasizing strong federal oversight, and evidence-based analysis, with the public's interests in mind. John Judis had a good item on this earlier in the year.
Judis added that Obama's regulatory appointments "could not be more different" from those we've seen in recent years, and "the flow of expertise into the federal bureaucracy over the past year has been reminiscent of what took place at the start of the New Deal." Good. I know we're dealing with obscure government officials in unseen government offices, but it's hard to overstate how much of a difference this makes in Americans' daily lives. Of course, it's worth noting that in the Clinton administration's first two years, the president tried to revamp regulatory agencies, too. Republicans took over Congress in 1995, and blocked many of those efforts. Here's hoping history doesn't repeat itself. —Steve Benen 1:25 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (17)
Comments
The late great Molly Ivins described the "under the radar" efforts by Bush to weaken federal regulations in "BushWhacked". It's an important read for anyone trying to understand what needs to be rebuilt. Posted by: jeanne marie on May 13, 2010 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINK17.1% unemployment,seamless continuation of virtually all of Bush's policies,the Dems are toast. Posted by: par4 on May 13, 2010 at 1:47 PM | PERMALINKThis bud's fer Al: It is quite obvious to even the stoopidest Repugnant (Boehner, Pence, Kantor, King NY, King Iowa --anyone?) or the most vicious Tea partier: All this regulation is just to TAKE AWAY OUR FREEDOM. Government IS the problem, as Ronnie Rayguns infallibly stated. Posted by: neill on May 13, 2010 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK"Industry leaders are complaining..." Industry leaders are complaining... To whom? Who is holding the smoking gun they just pointed at their own foot? Posted by: Doug Bostrom on May 13, 2010 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKPity it has to kept under the radar. This speaks to the public's lack of appreciation of such restoration and improvement. Why is this? When circumstances are adverse it seems people generally take their frustration and discomfort out on the government and the party in power. By and large most people seem unable or unwilling to look intelligently at the causes and valid solutions to their predicaments. They only want to complain without sharing responsibility in working to resolve the problems. It points to an over-indulged, under educated populace behaving like spoiled children having tantrums. What a pity. Posted by: Goldilocks on May 13, 2010 at 2:03 PM | PERMALINK@ Neill: After I got done laughing loudly at your comment, there are only a couple of things to say: 1. What freedom are you protecting, precisely? The freedom to maintain crappy mining conditions that will kill 29 or more miners? 2. If government is the problem, then I'm sure you'll agree with me that Louisiana and other Gulf Coast really don't need ee-vil federal government money to clean up the damage from the BP oil spill. Posted by: Peter on May 13, 2010 at 2:05 PM | PERMALINKThe most obvious difference was between James Lee Witt and Michael Brown as head of FEMA, under Clinton and Bush respectively.
And the amazing thing is that the administration is accomplishing this while significant numbers of important executive branch appointments are being held hostage AND depressingly high numbers of BushWhacking gophers managed to tunnel from political to career status and are doing their damnedest to stall, distract and undermine the effort (Minerals Management Services, anyone??). Posted by: Larry McD on May 13, 2010 at 2:20 PM | PERMALINKAnd while the oil industry execs were being questioned yesterday, the rethugs were attending a fundraiser with the oil company lobbyists! Posted by: Joan on May 13, 2010 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINKDidn't Clinton sign the deregulation bill that caused 1/2 this mess? Posted by: rick on May 13, 2010 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINKThis is a very important point that I make constantly to anyone who will listen. You don't just vote for a President. The party that controls the White House controls thousands of key jobs in the executive and judicial branches - people who make thousands of crucial decisions every day. Regardless of what you think about the candidates, the key question is whether you want all these people to be Democrats or Republicans. Posted by: Virginia on May 13, 2010 at 2:50 PM | PERMALINK I thought this was going to be the "transparent administration"... Posted by: J on May 13, 2010 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINKRE: J's post... "I thought this was going to be the "transparent administration"..." I think you will find that all this is taking place pretty much in public since all regulatory changes must include public comment periods and be reported in the Federal Register. Perhaps the apparent lack of transparancy mostly is due to the administration choosing not to highlight the effort and the press choosing not to report on it. As an aside, I believe Peter Orzag's comment that we start from the perspective of the social goals "we want" to drive smart regulatory policy is important. Posted by: DavidI on May 13, 2010 at 4:53 PM | PERMALINKHerzlich Willkommen in unseren Sextalk.
Willkommen hier im Flirtchat.
Herzlich Willkommen in unseren Erotik-Chat. Dieser Erotik-Chat bietet dir die Alternative free live websexy und jedemenge andere Sachen,unter anderem Flirt und Sextalk 
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly |
||||||
