Regulatory Policy - RegWatch

RegWatch:

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

Friday, May 23, 2008

Yesterday, the Senate passed an amendment to the war supplemental bill that will put the brakes on several controversial Medicaid regulations. The Bush administration has finalized, or is preparing to finalize, the regulations in an effort to cut federal funding for a variety of Medicaid programs administered by the states. (More details on the regulations here.)

The administration developed the regulations under the guise of "fiscal integrity," arguing state Medicaid programs are using loopholes to inappropriately claim federal funds. Bush has threatened to veto the bill. Fortunately, the amendment passed the Senate in a 75-22 vote and also cleared the House by a veto-proof margin.

On May 6, more than 100 hospitals, providers, school districts and public interest groups (including OMB Watch) wrote to Congress in support of the legislation, which will place moratoria on all seven of the regulations until April 1, 2009. The letter says, "Taken together, the impact of these regulations would undermine the viability of our nation's health care safety net and reduce or eliminate access to health care services for many millions of low income patients."

Critics also question the administration's authority to make such major changes to Medicaid. For example, one of the proposed rules would limit the ability of state governments to provide rehabilitation services (such as transitions to independent housing) for people with mental illnesses or developmental disabilities. The Bush administration floated this limitation as a legislative proposal in 2006, but Congress rejected it.

Kudos to members in both chambers voting yea: they stood up to the administration's efforts to hobble state Medicaid programs.

From a government operations standpoint, Congress should also be commended for reestablishing control over issues that are properly within its purview and rebuking the administration's efforts to reinterpret federal law through administrative means.

Posted by Matt Madia, 12:00:40 PM

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

CPSC Chief Balks at Would-Be Lead Standard

Speaking yesterday to the National Retail Federation, Nancy Nord, head of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, said a new federal standard limiting lead in children's products "might prove to be overly broad," according to BNA news service (subscription).

The limit on lead is contained in a product safety bill currently being considered by Congress. The bill would require CPSC to set a standard limiting lead in children's products to trace amounts (100 parts per million for the content and 90 parts per million for paint or coatings).

Americans need a strict federal standard on lead in children's products for two reasons. First, as we have known for decades, lead is dangerous. Children and fetuses are particularly susceptible to the effects of lead. Even at low levels, lead exposure can lead to reduced IQs, learning disabilities, or behavioral problems.

Second, American consumers have recently been facing big problems with lead contaminated products and are increasingly concerned. In 2007, CPSC announced 106 recalls of lead-contaminated children's products totaling 17,126,810 individual items — a 500 percent increase from 2006.

Considering the gravity of the situation, one would think Nord would want strong federal action — perhaps even preferring to err on the side of over-protection. Sadly, Nord, an appointee of President Bush and former lobbyist for corporate interests, does not seem interested in seeing that her agency fulfills its mission of protecting the public.

On a related note: What the heck happened to the CPSC reform bill, which includes the lead standard and other important provisions? The House bill (H.R. 4040) passed in December and the Senate bill (S. 2663) passed in early March.

Despite overwhelming support in both chambers, the conferencing process, where the differences between the two bills will be reconciled, is in its infancy. Leadership from both parties only got around to naming conferees in early May.

Democratic leaders had hoped to finalize the bill before last Christmas. But at the rate Congress is going, they'll be lucky to finish it by this Christmas. Meanwhile, CPSC continues to announce recalls of lead-contaminated children's products (here and here, for recent examples).

Yet Congressional leadership continues to leave consumers without a strong product safety regulator. Truly disappointing.

Posted by Matt Madia, 12:08:38 PM

Friday, May 02, 2008

House Pushes for Combustible Dust Protections

On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed a bill that would require the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to develop regulations to protect workers from the hazards of combustible dust. The bill comes largely in response to a dust explosion in February that killed 14 workers at a Georgia sugar refinery. Because of his overwhelming disdain for federal protections in the workplace, President Bush has threatened to veto the bill.

For more on why the bill is necessary, and for a brief recap of the floor debate, visit the Pump Handle blog: "House Passes Combustible Dust Bill"

Posted by Matthew Madia, 01:12:01 PM

Latest Entries by Theme

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues