Institutional Roles and Goals for Retrospective Regulatory Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 466-493
Author(s):  
Lori S. Bennear ◽  
Jonathan B. Wiener
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Regulatory Review ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Learning Goal ◽  
Repeated Calls ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
Slow Progress ◽  
Regulatory Analysis ◽  
The U.S

AbstractDespite repeated calls for retrospective regulatory review by every President since the 1970s, progress on implementing such reviews has been slow. We argue that part of the explanation for the slow progress to date stems from misalignment between the goals of regulatory review and the institutional framework used for the review. We define three distinct goals of regulatory review – the rule relevance goal, the rule improvement goal, and the regulatory learning goal. We then examine the text of the Presidential Executive Orders and major Congressional legislation addressing retrospective review, and document which goals were targeted and which institutions were used to conduct the reviews. We find that the U.S. federal government has almost always sought review of one rule at a time, conducted by the agency that issued or promulgated the rule and that these reviews tend to focus on rule relevance and costs. This institutional framework for retrospective review – one rule, assessed by the promulgating agency, focused on relevance and cost – is only well-suited to a narrow interpretation of the rule improvement goal. We then review alternative institutional structures that could better meet the rule improvement goal and the broader regulatory learning goal across multiple rules and agencies, and we offer recommendations for developing new guidance and institutions to promote multiagency regulatory learning.

Institutional actors: Children’s emerging beliefs about the causal structure of social roles

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Noyes ◽  
Frank Keil ◽  
Yarrow Dunham
Keyword(s):  
Soccer Player ◽  
Social Roles ◽  
Social Role ◽  
Causal Structure ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
The Social ◽  
The World ◽  
Children's Beliefs ◽  
Institutional Actors ◽  
The U.S

Institutions make new forms of acting possible: Signing executive orders, scoring goals, and officiating weddings are only possible because of the U.S. government, the rules of soccer, and the institution of marriage. Thus, when an individual occupies a particular social role (President, soccer player, and officiator) they acquire new ways of acting on the world. The present studies investigated children’s beliefs about institutional actions, and in particular whether children understand that individuals can only perform institutional actions when their community recognizes them as occupying the appropriate social role. Two studies (Study 1, N = 120 children, 4-11; Study 2, N = 90 children, 4-9) compared institutional actions to standard actions that do not depend on institutional recognition. In both studies, 4- to 5-year-old children believed all actions were possible regardless of whether an individual was recognized as occupying the social role. In contrast, 8- to 9-year-old children robustly distinguished between institutional and standard actions; they understood that institutional actions depend on collective recognition by a community.

Epilogue

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric K. Yamamoto
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Courts Of Appeals ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Judicial Scrutiny ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Assistance Project

The concise Epilogue describes the U.S. Supreme Court’s late-2017 vacation of the courts of appeals rulings in the International Refugee Assistance Project v. Trump and Hawaii v. Trump cases (determining that the litigated controversy over the president’s January and March 2017 exclusionary executive orders was moot). It incorporates Justice Sotomayor’s dissent and notes that the lower court rulings “may be persuasive and cited as guidance, but not as binding precedent.” It observes therefore that the Korematsu conundrum persists at the heart of these and future liberty and security controversies: careful judicial scrutiny or near unconditional deference, judicial independence or court passivity.

scholarly journals New Zealand's Oceans Policy

2003 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Foster
Keyword(s):  
Resource Management ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Institutional Framework ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Guiding Principles ◽  
Policy Refinement

In light of recent Oceans Policy developments this paper proposes a legal and institutional framework for the management of New Zealand's oceans. It focuses on one key existing problem: the lack of a comprehensive, coherent framework for the sustainable management of the marine environment. The proposed framework addresses this issue by suggesting an overarching statute, based on the approach taken by the Resource Management Act, under which several layers of policy refinement and implementation create national consistency coexisting with localised solutions based on the purpose of sustainability and broad guiding principles. The proposal is consistent with New Zealand's international obligations, other domestic legislation and existing institutional structures. The paper concludes with a statement on the importance to our future well-being of developing a comprehensive and enduring Oceans Policy.

scholarly journals Sanctions in U.S. - Russia Relations

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 504-520
Author(s):  
Charles E. Ziegler
Keyword(s):  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Maximum Pressure ◽  
Significant Deterioration ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Rogue States ◽  
Leading Position ◽  
The U.S

Given America’s leading position in the global economy, the U.S. government has frequently leveraged that power to punish “rogue states”, discourage nuclear proliferation, promote democratization, and create pressure for regime change. Washington relied on economic incentives in relations with Russia after 1991, but since 2012 the United States has utilized a broad range of economic sanctions against Russian side, leading to a significant deterioration in what was already a troubled relationship. In contrast to earlier comprehensive sanctions like those imposed on Iraq and Haiti, the U.S. is now crafting “smart” or targeted sanctions designed to exert maximum pressure on selected Russian elites and firms. Rather than evaluating the effectiveness of these measures on changing Russian behavior, the author explores the neglected domestic dimension of the U.S. sanctions process to improve understanding of U.S. foreign policy. This article draws on primary sources in the form of Congressional legislation, executive orders, and official statements to analyze U.S. sanctions imposed on Russia, and develops three brief case studies - the Magnitsky Act, post-Ukraine sanctions, and the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act - to explicate the main issues and actors driving U.S. sanctions. The author argues that domestic factors, including Congressional pressures and interest group activity, are critical to understanding U.S. sanctions regimes. While President Donald Trump has frequently resisted congressionally imposed sanctions, expectations for a more conciliatory approach towards Russia under the Trump administration have not materialized.

Policy analysis in the United States

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David L. Weimer
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Army Corps ◽  
Government Accountability ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Investment Projects ◽  
Service Support ◽  
Congressional Budget Office ◽  
Environmental Impact Statements ◽  
The U.S

Four demands have driven the development of policy analysis in the U.S. First, reformers have sought evidence to support their efforts. Beginning with the municipal bureaus of the Progressive Era, advocacy groups have sought supportive policy analysis, resulting in the proliferation of ideologically differentiated think tanks that produce policy research. Second, politicians have recognized the need for specialized expertise to address pressing problems. Operations research grew out of efforts to solve problems facing the U.S. in World War II and led to subsequent efforts to improve bureaucratic decision-making capacity. Third, the growing scope and complexity of government have led to a demand for information to support routine decision processes. Fiscal offices support state budgeting and the Congressional Budget Office, Government Accountability Office, and Congressional Research Service support the routine business of Congress. Fourth, politicians have sought to discipline their own (and especially others’) future actions by mandating that analyses be applied to certain classes of decisions. Legislative requirements that the Army Corps of Engineers consider the benefits of investment projects were introduced at the beginning of the last century, legislative requirements for the completion of environmental impact statements were imposed in 1970, and beginning in 1981, executive orders have required cost-benefit analyses be completed for major agency rulemakings. Higher education has responded to these demands by supplying persons trained specifically in policy analysis.

Federal Indian Law

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Bruce Duthu
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Body ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
Federal Indian Law ◽  
Dominant Society ◽  
Indian Tribes ◽  
Formal Relations ◽  
Indian Law ◽  
The U.S

United States law recognizes American Indian tribes as distinct political bodies with powers of self-government. Their status as sovereign entities predates the formation of the United States and they are enumerated in the U.S. Constitution as among the subjects (along with foreign nations and the several states) with whom Congress may engage in formal relations. And yet, despite this long-standing recognition, federal Indian law remains curiously ambivalent, even conflicted, about the legal and political status of Indian tribes within the U.S. constitutional structure. On the one hand, tribes are recognized as sovereign bodies with powers of self-government within their lands. On the other, long-standing precedents of the Supreme Court maintain that Congress possesses plenary power over Indian tribes, with authority to modify or even eliminate their powers of self-government. These two propositions are in tension with one another and are at the root of the challenges faced by political leaders and academics alike in trying to understand and accommodate the tribal rights to self-government. The body of laws that make up the field of federal Indian law include select provisions of the U.S. Constitution (notably the so-called Indian Commerce Clause), treaties between the United States and various Indian tribes, congressional statutes, executive orders, regulations, and a complex and rich body of court decisions dating back to the nation’s formative years. The noted legal scholar Felix Cohen brought much-needed coherence and order to this legal landscape in the 1940s when he led a team of scholars within the Office of the Solicitor in the Department of the Interior to produce a handbook on federal Indian law. The revised edition of Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law is still regarded as the seminal treatise in the field. Critically, however, this rich body of law only hints at the real story in federal Indian law. The laws themselves serve as historical and moral markers in the ongoing clash between indigenous and nonindigenous societies and cultures still seeking to establish systems of peaceful coexistence in shared territories. It is a story about the limits of legal pluralism and the willingness of a dominant society and nation to acknowledge and honor its promises to the first inhabitants and first sovereigns.

scholarly journals Diplopia and Strabismus After Corneal Refractive Surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 185 (5-6) ◽  
pp. e755-e758 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Mehta ◽  
Donovan Reed ◽  
Kyle E Miller
Keyword(s):  
Health System ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Refractive Surgery ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Minimal Risk ◽  
Military Health System ◽  
Military Health ◽  
Operational Readiness ◽  
Corneal Refractive Surgery ◽  
The U.S

Abstract Introduction Diplopia and strabismus are known complications after corneal refractive surgery (CRS). Within the U.S. Armed Forces, refractive surgery is used to improve the operational readiness of the service member, and these complications could cause significant degradation to their capability. This study was performed in order to identify the incidence of strabismus and diplopia following CRS within the U.S. Military Health System. Methods A retrospective review of all patients who underwent photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) or laser-assisted in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in the Department of Defense from January 2006 through September 2013 was designed and approved by the Naval Medical Center Portsmouth Institutional Review Board. The military health system data mart was queried for all patients who underwent one of these procedures and subsequently had an International Classification of Disease-9 code for any strabismus or diplopia through 2014 allowing at least 1 year of follow-up. We then calculated the incidence of both diplopia and strabismus for these procedures as the primary measure and the overall prevalence as a secondary measure. Results A total of 108,157 patients underwent PRK or LASIK during our study period with 41 of these patients subsequently having a diagnosis of diplopia or strabismus. After chart review, 16 of these patients were excluded resulting in 25 patients for inclusion in either the strabismus (23 patients, 0.02%) or diplopia (3 patients, 0.003%) cohorts with one patient having both. Of the 23 patients with postoperative strabismus, 4 were new cases giving an incidence of 0.004% and 2 new cases of diplopia for an incidence of 0.002%. Conclusion Diplopia and strabismus are rare complications after CRS in the U.S. military population. These procedures continue to increase the operational readiness of our service members with minimal risk of these potentially debilitating complications. Overall, this study provides support for the continued use of PRK and LASIK despite study limitations related to the use of large databases for retrospective review. Future prospective studies using delineated preoperative and postoperative examinations with sensorimotor testing included may be able to resolve the limitations of this study.

Managing Diversity

2019 ◽  
pp. 266-289
Author(s):  
Irene Bloemraad ◽  
Doris Marie Provine
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
The Political ◽  
Managing Diversity ◽  
Law And Policy ◽  
Institutional Structures ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
The U.S

Comparing the United States (U.S.) and Canadian responses to immigration in the context of each country’s civil rights struggles underscores the importance of history, geography, demography, and institutional structures in determining law and policy. Civil rights in the U.S. required a civil war over slavery and created an important role for courts to interpret constitutional mandates of equal treatment. Constitutionally enshrined individual rights came late to Canada and change occurred often through piecemeal legislative and bureaucratic action rather than litigation. Such differences in the trajectory of rights influence differences in immigration policy: active support and management of entry and integration in Canada versus an ambiguous welcome and laissez-faire incorporation in the U.S. Looking to the future, the political system and contentious views on immigration make policymaking difficult in the U.S., while Canadian policymakers enjoy more public support and flexibility as they take on the challenges and opportunities of immigration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document