Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Digital Commons Network

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network

Rethinking Regulatory Democracy, Mariano-Florentino Cuellar Sep 2004

Rethinking Regulatory Democracy, Mariano-Florentino Cuellar

ExpressO

This article empirically examines democratic participation in three different regulatory proceedings, involving financial privacy, nuclear regulation, and campaign finance. It then uses that analysis to critique -- and suggest alternatives to -- existing mechanisms to achieve public participation in the regulatory state. The current mechanism for structuring public participation in regulatory decisions (or “regulatory democracy”) relies on demand-driven procedures like the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice and comment process. Organized interests and others who decide they have sufficient resources and interest to do so comment on regulations. While some observers consider this process close to ideal, others instead seem to accept …


The Cocaine Vaccine, Dru Stevenson Apr 2004

The Cocaine Vaccine, Dru Stevenson

ExpressO

The controversial new cocaine vaccine (TA-CD) has the potential to be an extremely effective treatment tool for recovering addicts, but it also presents opportunities for non-therapeutic uses, such as preventing cocaine use in the first place. It is foreseeable that the cocaine vaccine could become a condition of parole or probation, or receiving welfare payments, or for employment in certain occupations. Universal vaccination is also a possibility but less likely for political reasons. This article investigates each of these areas of potential use. Any setting where mandatory drug testing is currently in place could become a venue for the vaccination. …


Rethinking Public Engagement In The Administrative State, Mariano-Florentino Cuellar Jan 2004

Rethinking Public Engagement In The Administrative State, Mariano-Florentino Cuellar

ExpressO

This Article presents an empirical, doctrinal, and theoretical critique of public engagement in the modern administrative state. The legitimacy of the administrative state depends on the claim that it provides opportunities for public engagement as well as a mechanism for expert scientific decisionmaking. A typical rulemaking proceeding lets experts make technical judgments about terrorism, transportation, or telecommunications subject to court review guarding against arbitrariness. The whole process is then enmeshed in a system that is supposed to provide engagement – and therefore democratic accountability -- through presidential appointments and control, congressional oversight, and the public notice-and-comment process. This existing approach …