Industry's Secret Weapon
Also in Environment
Whistleblowers Say Oil Reserve Numbers Deliberately Inflated to Avoid Panic, Appease the US
Matthew McDermott
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon
Why the End May Be Coming for Coal
Christine MacDonald
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman
How an Entire Town Leveled By a Tornado Is Rebuilding Green
Melissa Knopper
Obama, It's Time to Lead on Climate Change in Copenhagen
Janet Redman
If you've never heard of the Information Quality Act (IQA), you're not alone. When it cleared Congress in 2000, most senators and representatives didn't even know they were voting for it; the two-paragraph provision had been quietly attached only hours before to a massive appropriations bill. But vote for it they did, and it became law without benefit of congressional hearing or debate. Despite its brevity and furtive entrance onto the legislative stage, the act has come to be a powerful weapon in the Bush administration's attack on environmental, health, and safety protections.
The IQA directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to promulgate "policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information ... disseminated by Federal agencies."
That's a simple enough charge. But the administration's application of the law has extended far beyond the text of the statute, inviting industry to challenge not just information disseminated by the government — such as pamphlets or web materials — but information used to support regulation. If industry had no other way to challenge regulatory decisions, that might be understandable. But that's not the case; industry has many ways, and uses them liberally. And now industry is using the IQA as a means to hector and delay regulators, throwing yet another roadblock in the path of sensible safeguards for the public.
A new report, "Truth and Science Betrayed: The Case Against the Information Quality Act," describes in detail the ways industry has taken the administration up on its offer to clog the regulatory process with IQA challenges. Researchers examined IQA petitions filed to date and found repeated attempts to:
Sidney A. Shapiro is a member of the board of directors of the Center for Progressive Regulation and holds the University Distinguished Chair in Law at the Wake Forest University School of Law. He is a co-author of CPR's report, "Truth and Science Betrayed: The Case Against the Information Quality Act."
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »
| More News and Analysis: | ||
|
Relentless Pressure from Progressive Groups Pushes Hatemonger Lou Dobbs Out of CNN Media and Technology: Groups like BastaDobbs have done in Dobbs, who used his media platform to stir up racist, anti-immigrant hysteria for years. By Tana Ganeva, AlterNet. November 12, 2009. |
Two More Legal Residents Caught in the Maw of our Immigration-Security-State Immigration: Opponents of reform say the system's fine as it is ... are they serious? By Seth Hoy, Immigration Impact. November 12, 2009. |
Muslim-Americans Have Good Reason to Fear Fort Hood Backlash Rights and Liberties: Though anti-Muslim hysteria has leveled off somewhat since September 11, Muslims still routinely get the blame for anything that even remotely smacks of a terrorist act. By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, New America Media. November 12, 2009. |
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.