Law Commons^™

Knowledge In The People: Rethinking "Value" In Public Rulemaking Participation, Cynthia R. Farina, Dmitry Epstein, Josiah Heidt, Mary J. Newhart

Cynthia R. Farina

A companion piece to Rulemaking vs. Democracy: Judging and Nudging Public Participation that Counts, this Essay continues to examine the nature and value of broader public participation in rulemaking. Here, we argue that rulemaking is a “community of practice,” with distinctive forms of argumentation and methods of reasoning that both reflect and embody craft knowledge. Rulemaking newcomers are outside this community of practice: Even when they are reasonably informed about the legal and policy aspects of the agency’s proposal, their participation differs in kind and form from that of sophisticated commenters. From observing the actual behavior of rulemaking newcomers in …

Achieving The Potential: The Future Of Federal E-Rulemaking: A Report To Congress And The President, Cynthia R. Farina

Cynthia R. Farina

Federal regulations are among the most important and widely used tools for implementing the laws of the land – affecting the food we eat, the air we breathe, the safety of consumer products, the quality of the workplace, the soundness of our financial institutions, the smooth operation of our businesses, and much more. Despite the central role of rulemaking in executing public policy, both regulated entities (especially small businesses) and the general public find it extremely difficult to follow the regulatory process; actively participating in it is even harder. E-rulemaking is the use of technology (particularly, computers and the World …

Rulemaking 2.0, Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart, Claire Cardie, Dan Cosley

Cynthia R. Farina

In response to President Obama's Memorandum on Transparency and Open Government, federal agencies are on the verge of a new generation in online rulemaking. However, unless we recognize the several barriers to making rulemaking a more broadly participatory process, and purposefully adapt Web 2.0 technologies and methods to lower those barriers, Rulemaking 2.0 is likely to disappoint agencies and open-government advocates alike. This article describes the design, operation, and initial results of Regulation Room, a pilot public rulemaking participation platform created by a cross-disciplinary group of Cornell researchers in collaboration with the Department of Transportation. Regulation Room uses selected live …

Rulemaking Vs. Democracy: Judging And Nudging Public Participation That Counts, Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart, Josiah Heidt

Cynthia R. Farina

An underlying assumption of many open government enthusiasts is that more public participation will necessarily lead to better government policymaking: If we use technology to give people easier opportunities to participate in public policymaking, they will use these opportunities to participate effectively. Yet, experience thus far with technology-enabled rulemaking (e-rulemaking) has not confirmed this “if-then” causal link. This Article considers how this flawed causal reasoning around technology has permeated efforts to increase public participation in rulemaking.

Rulemaking 2.0: Understanding And Getting Better Public Participation, Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart

Cynthia R. Farina

More than a decade after the launch of Regulations.gov, the government-wide federal online rulemaking portal, and nearly four years since the Obama Administration directed agencies to use “innovative tools and practices that create new and easier methods for public engagement,” there are still more questions than answers about what value social media and other Web 2 .0 technologies can bring to rulemaking–and about how agencies can realize that value. This report, commissioned by the IBM Center for the Business of Government, begins to provide those answers. Drawing on insights from a number of disciplines and on three years of actual …

Enhancing The Use Of Negotiated Rulemaking By The U.S. Department Of Education, Jeffrey Lubbers

Reports

White paper for the American Council on Education, published as Appendix IV, Recalibrating Regulation of Colleges and Universities, Report of the Task Force on Federal Regulation of Higher Education, 90-125 (2015), available at http://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/Regulations_Task_Force_Report_2015_FINAL.pdf

Enhancing The Use Of Negotiated Rulemaking By The U.S. Department Of Education, Jeffrey Lubbers

Jeffrey Lubbers

Far From Fair, Farther From Efficient: The Ftc And The Hyper-Formalization Of Informal Rulemaking, Cooper J. Spinelli

Legislation and Policy Brief

Partially concerned with the proliferation of the “New Deal” agencies, Congress saw theAPAas a “compromise measure.” That is, Congress designed it to afford “uniformity and fairness in administrative procedures without at the same time unduly interfering with the efficient and economical operation of government.” Scholars and jurists from across the political spectrum have recognized that the notice-and-comment process allows for relative flexibility that can help “foster better government” by setting policy prospectively and expeditiously, thereby striking a reasonable balance between fairness and efficiency. In contrast to adjudicative measures, informal rulemaking can offer holistic treatment to market disorders—with considerable public input—without …

Rulemaking Vs. Democracy: Judging And Nudging Public Participation That Counts, Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart, Josiah Heidt

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

An underlying assumption of many open government enthusiasts is that more public participation will necessarily lead to better government policymaking: If we use technology to give people easier opportunities to participate in public policymaking, they will use these opportunities to participate effectively. Yet, experience thus far with technology-enabled rulemaking (e-rulemaking) has not confirmed this “if-then” causal link. This Article considers how this flawed causal reasoning around technology has permeated efforts to increase public participation in rulemaking.

City Of Arlington V. Fcc: Jurisdictional Or Nonjurisdictional, Where To Draw The Line?, Whitney Ruijuan Hao

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Soda Ban Or The Portion Cap Rule? Litigation Over The Size Of Sugary Drink Containers As An Exercise In Framing, Rodger D. Citron, Paige Bartholomew

Rodger Citron

The authors discuss the litigation over New York City’s “Portion Cap Rule,” which restricts the size of sugary drink containers. The authors provide a history of the rule, from its promulgation by the Board of Health to the Appellate Division’s decision invalidating the rule. The authors also comment on the dispute between the parties over how to frame the rule. Opponents of the rule characterize the measure as an unwarranted and unprecedented incursion of consumer choice and personal freedom. Proponents of the rule, including the City, view the rule as a modest measure intended to address obesity, a significant—even alarming—public …

Tentative Interpretations: The Abracadabra Of Administrative Rulemaking And The End Of 'Alaska Hunters', Matthew P. Downer

Vanderbilt Law Review

Agency flexibility is a battlefield. When circumstances change or a new regime takes power, federal agencies often adjust their settled regulations to reflect new realities. There is a persistent struggle, however, between preserving this flexibility and protecting those who relied upon the previous regulations.' When an agency changes course, regulated entities must comply, often with little warning and at great expense. In 1946, Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") to balance these interests by restricting when and how agencies can promulgate and change regulations.

Unsurprisingly, the APA did not achieve a lasting d6tente. Instead, it merely created new fronts …

Harnessing Private Regulation, Lesley K. Mcallister

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

In private regulation, private actors make, implement, and enforce rules that serve traditional public goals. While private safety standards have a long history, private social and environmental regulation in the forms of self-regulation, sup-ply chain contracting, and voluntary certification and labeling programs have proliferated in the past couple decades. This expansion of private regulation raises the question of how it might be harnessed by public actors to build better regula-tory regimes. This Article tackles this question first by identifying three forms of strong harnessing: public incorporation of private standards, public endorsement of self-regulation, and third-party verification. It then analyzes eight …

A Pragmatic Republic, If You Can Keep It, William R. Sherman

Michigan Law Review

These things we know to be true: Our modern administrative state is a leviathan unimaginable by the Founders. It stands on thin constitutional ice, on cracks between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. It burdens and entangles state and local governments in schemes that threaten federalism. And it presents an irresolvable dilemma regarding democratic accountability and political independence. We know these things to be true because these precepts animate some of the most significant cases and public law scholarship of our time. Underlying our examination of administrative agencies is an assumption that the problems they present would have been bizarre …

The Puzzling Presumption Of Reviewability, Nicholas Bagley

Articles

The presumption in favor of judicial review of agency action is a cornerstone of administrative law, accepted by courts and commentators alike as both legally appropriate and obviously desirable. Yet the presumption is puzzling. As with any canon of statutory construction that serves a substantive end, it should find a source in history, positive law, the Constitution, or sound policy considerations. None of these, however, offers a plausible justification for the presumption. As for history, the sort of judicial review that the presumption favors - appellate-style arbitrariness review - was not only unheard of prior to the twentieth century, but …

Private Control Over Access To Public Law: The Perplexing Federal Regulatory Use Of Private Standards, Nina A. Mendelson

Articles

To save resources and build on private expertise, federal agencies have incorporated privately drafted standards into thousands of federal regulations — but only by “reference.” These standards range widely, subsuming safety, benefits, and testing standards. An individual who seeks access to this binding law generally cannot freely read it online or in a governmental depository library, as she can the U.S. Code or the Code of Federal Regulations. Instead, she generally must pay a significant fee to the drafting organization, or else she must travel to Washington, D.C., to the Office of the Federal Register’s reading room. This law, under …

Essential Health Benefits And The Affordable Care Act: Law And Process, Nicholas Bagley, Helen Levy

Articles

Starting in 2014, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will require private insurance plans sold in the individual and small-group markets to cover a roster of "essential health benefits." Precisely which benefits should count as essential, however, was left to the discretion of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The matter was both important and controversial. Nonetheless, HHS announced its policy by posting on the Internet a thirteen-page bulletin stating that it would allow each state to define essential benefits for itself. On both substance and procedure, the move was surprising. The state-by-state approach departed from the uniform, federal …

Responding To Agency Avoidance Of Oira, Nina A. Mendelson, Jonathan B. Wiener

Articles

This Article proceeds as follows: Part I provides a background of the system of presidential oversight of regulation through OIRA review. Part II analyzes: (1) the incentives for agencies to cooperate with or avoid OIRA, (2) a broad array of agency avoidance tactics, and (3) corresponding response options (especially in a repeat-player relationship). Part III argues that response options to agency avoidance should not be unquestioningly pursued or rejected. Instead, they should be evaluated using many of the same principles OIRA employs in reviewing agency regulation, including a systematic consideration of the benefits and costs of particular response actions and …

The Value Of Words: Narrative As Evidence In Policymaking, Dmitry Epstein, Josiah Heidt, Cynthia R. Farina

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Policymakers today rely primarily on statistical, financial, and other forms of technical data as their basis for decision-making. Yet, there is a potentially underestimated value in substantive reflections of the members of the public who will be affected by a particular piece of regulation. We discuss the value of narratives as input in the policy making process, based on our experience with Regulation Room–a product of an interdisciplinary initiative using innovative web technologies in real-time online experimentation. We describe professional policymakers and professional commenters as a community of practice that has limited shared repertoire with the lay members of the …