Senate Panel Passes Reg Reform

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee Tuesday moved to revive congressional interest in regulatory reform, passing scaled-down legislation requiring federal agencies to assess the costs and benefits of new rules.

The legislation, approved on an 8-4 vote, requires cost/benefit studies of regulations that have an economic impact of $100 million or more a year.

It would also require agencies to make clear who would be at risk and to what degree for regulations that concern health and safety issues.

Governmental Affairs Chairman Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., who cosponsored the bill with Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said it would promote the public's right to know, increase government accountability and improve the quality of government decision making, the Associated Press reported.

Thompson said he did not know when the bill would be considered on the Senate floor. Similar legislation also is pending in the House.

Thompson and Levin came together on a more modest, bipartisan approach to regulatory reform after Democrats successfully blocked Republican attempts to pass more far-reaching legislation in 1995.

Under the Thompson-Levin bill, agencies would have to offer explanations if they decided to go ahead with a rule when the costs appear to outweigh the benefits.

But, as in past proposals, an agency would not have to abandon a rule based on cost/benefit analysis.

Also, their measure would make it harder for agencies to be sued over regulations. A cost/benefit decision would not be grounds for suing an agency.

Mark Whitenton, vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers, praised the legislation for encouraging smarter government regulations. "This bill will not interfere with an agency's ability to regulate but will establish a more open and honest process for developing rules," he said.

But the Environmental Defense Fund said it offered too many opportunities for those being regulated to delay new public protections and hinder decisions on health, safety and the environment.

Democrats on the committee tried to exempt such areas as children's health, food safety and civil rights from the scope of the bill, but were defeated.