Law Commons^™

Barriers To Participatory Erulemaking Platform Adoption: Lessons Learned From Regulationroom, Mary J. Newhart, Joshua D. Brooks

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

Rulemaking, the process through which United States (U.S.) federal government agencies develop major health, safety and economic regulations, was an early target of electronic government (e-government) efforts. Because it was an established decision-making process that had substantial formal requirements of transparency, public participation and responsiveness it seemed a perfect target for technology-supported participatory policymaking. It was believed that new technologies could transform rulemaking, increasing its democratic legitimacy and improving its policy outcomes by broadening the range of participating individuals and groups (Brandon and Carlitz, 2003; Coglianese, 2004; Noveck, 2004). Despite the promise of a more deliberative and democratic process, rulemaking …

Strategic Rulemaking Disclosure, Jennifer Nou, Edward H. Stiglitz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Congressional enactments and executive orders instruct agencies to publish their anticipated rules in what is known as the Unified Agenda. The Agenda’s stated purpose is to ensure that political actors can monitor regulatory development. Agencies have come under fire in recent years, however, for conspicuous omissions and irregularities. Critics allege that agencies hide their regulations from the public strategically, that is, to thwart potential political opposition. Others contend that such behavior is benign, perhaps the inevitable result of changing internal priorities or unforeseen events.

To examine these competing hypotheses, this Article uses a new dataset spanning over thirty years of …

The Problem With Words: Plain Language And Public Participation In Rulemaking, Cynthia R. Farina, Mary J. Newhart, Cheryl Blake

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article, part of the special issue commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the Administrative Conference of the United States (“ACUS”), situates ACUS’s recommendations for improving public rulemaking participation in the context of the federal “plain language” movement. The connection between broader, better public participation and more comprehensible rulemaking materials seems obvious, and ACUS recommendations have recognized this connection for almost half a century. Remarkably, though, the series of presidential and statutory plain-language directives on this topic have not even mentioned the relationship of comprehensibility to participation until very recently. In 2012, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”) issued …

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.

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 …

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

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

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 …

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

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

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 …

Rulemaking In 140 Characters Or Less: Social Networking And Public Participation In Rulemaking, Cynthia R. Farina, Paul Miller, Mary J. Newhart, Claire Cardie, Dan Cosley, Rebecca Vernon

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Rulemaking—the process by which administrative agencies make new regulations—has long been a target for egovernment efforts. The process is now one of the most important ways the federal government makes public policy. Moreover, transparency and participation rights are already part of its legal structure. The first generation of federal erulemaking involved putting the conventional process online by creating an e-docket of rulemaking materials and allowing online submission of public comments. Now the Obama administration is urging agencies to embark on the second generation of technology-assisted rulemaking, by bringing social media into the process.

In this Article we describe the initial …

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

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 …

Achieving The Potential: The Future Of Federal E-Rulemaking: A Report To Congress And The President, Committee On The Status And Future Of Federal E-Rulemaking (U.S.), Cynthia R. Farina

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

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 Versus Adjudication: A Psychological Perspective, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Legal systems make law in one of two ways: by abstracting general principles from the decisions made in individual cases (the adjudicative process) or by declaring general principles through a centralized authority that are to be applied in individual cases (through the rulemaking process). Administrative agencies have long had the unfettered authority to choose between the two methods. Although each method could identify the same solution to the legal issues that come before them, in practice, the two systems commonly settle upon different resolutions. Each system presents the underlying legal issue from a different cognitive perspective, highlighting and hiding different …

Rulemaking Versus Adjudication: A Psychological Perspective, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Legal systems make law in one of two ways: by abstracting general principles from the decisions made in individual cases (through the adjudicative process) or by declaring general principles through a centralized authority that are to be applied in individual cases (through the rulemaking process). Administrative agencies have long had the unfettered authority to choose between the two methods. Although each method could identify the same solution to the legal issues that come before them, in practice, the two systems commonly settle upon different resolutions. Each system presents the underlying legal issue from a different cognitive perspective, highlighting and hiding …