Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Credo Mobile

HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Nonprofit Advocacy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

"[P]eople acting in a group can accomplish things which no individual acting alone could even hope to bring about." - FDR

Home :  Regulatory Policy :  RegWatch : 
RegWatch:     

News & Analysis | REG•WATCH Blog | Press Room

 R    E    G    •    W    A    T    C    H 


Thursday, July 28, 2005

Latest Case of Mad Cow

You think by now they'd have the system down.

An inconclusive test indicates that a third cow may have been infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). Once again, USDA faces complications in determining whether the cow had BSE.

First, though the sample was collected in April, it was only sent for testing in July. Evidently, the vet who took the sample forgot to submit it for testing. According to the L.A. Times, USDA's chief veterinarian John Clifford called the age of the sample "not optimal."

Moreover, the sample was preserved in such a way that USDA scientists cannot use the more advanced Western blot test (also known as the protein immunoblot test), to re-test the sample, but rather scientists must rely on the IHC test that gave the first inconclusive results. The IHC test also failed to catch the last case of BSE, but the case was eventually confirmed using the Western blot. Because the Western blot cannot be used in this case, the results may remain inconclusive. Fortunately, USDA recently adopted the Western blot as its new gold standard of BSE surveillance.

Posted by Genevieve Smith, 04:47:50 PM



Running on Empty: The Politics of Fuel Economy

According to the New York Times, EPA has withheld a report showing that due to loopholes in fuel efficiency standards, manufacturers have been allowed to produce cars that, on average, are significantly less fuel efficient than cars sold in the late 1980s. The loopholes give car manufacturers credits towards their fuel economy standards if they produce dual-fuel cars in their fleet—those that can run on both ethanol blend and gasoline. The credit then allows the manufacturers to add more inefficient cars such as SUVs and trucks to their fleet. Since so few gas stations have ethanol pumps, most consumers can't actually take advantage of the dual-fuel capabilities; manufacturers receive the fuel economy credit while most of the cars will never run on alternative fuel sources.

EPA plans to withhold the report on fuel economy until after the vote on the energy bill, which despite promises to greatly reduce the U.S's oil dependency, does little to improve fuel efficiency. The House passed the bill today, and the Senate is scheduled to do so as well. Read more:

Releasing the report this week would have been inopportune for the Bush administration, its critics said, because it would have come on the eve of a final vote in Congress on energy legislation six years in the making. The bill, as it stands, largely ignores auto mileage regulations.

The executive summary of the copy of the report obtained by The Times acknowledges that "fuel economy is directly related to energy security," because consumer cars and trucks account for about 40 percent of the nation's oil consumption. But trends highlighted in the report show that carmakers are not making progress in improving fuel economy, and environmentalists say the energy bill will do little to prod them.

Read the text of the embargoed report, provided by New York Times. For more on fuel economy, check out Public Citizen.

Posted by Genevieve Smith, 03:26:35 PM



Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Groups oppose Cox as SEC chair
The anti-investor record of Rep. Christopher Cox, President George W. Bush's nominee as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should disqualify him from leading the agency, according to a new report by Public Citizen.

Public Citizen joins with a broad group of investor advocates, public interest groups, labor unions, social investment funds and investment managers in expressing deep concern over the president's choice of Cox. In a time when many ordinary Americans have their retirement assets invested in securities via 401(k)s, the public is not well served by an SEC chairman with a record that does not support strong protections for investors.

Posted by Robert Shull, 12:45:49 PM



Thursday, July 21, 2005

Decision on Plan B Expected by Sept. 1
After much delay, FDA has now promised to make a decision on the over-the-counter status of Plan B by Sept. 1. The administration has been dragging its feet on a decision on the "morning after pill," despite broad support from the FDA advisory committee. Only after Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Patty Murray (D-WA) stalled the nomination of FDA head Lester Crawford did the administration finally promise to decide on the OTC status. Read more about Plan B here:

Posted by Genevieve Smith, 04:22:28 PM



Sunday, July 10, 2005

Recently in the news
Check out some of the latest news articles of interest to regulatory policy:

Assault on Science:

  • Chris Mooney, "Some Like It Hot," Mother Jones, May-June 2005

    Forty public policy groups have this in common: They seek to undermine the scientific consensus that humans are causing the earth to overheat. And they all get money from ExxonMobil.

  • Bill McKibben, "Climate of Denial," id.

    One morning in Kyoto, we won a round in the battle against global warming. Then special interests and pseudoscience snatched the truth away. What happened?

  • David Michaels, "Doubt Is Their Product," Scientific American, June 2005

    Industry groups are fighting government regulation by fomenting scientific uncertainty.

Special Breaks for Special Interests: Erik Kancler, "Getting Away With It: How Congressional Republicans have shielded MTBE polluters from liability," Mother Jones, May 24, 2005

Under the Radar: CBC News, "Concerns raised about 1997 U.S. mad cow tests," April 2005
Canadian news coverage raising questions about whether the USDA did not properly analyze two suspected cases of mad cow disease in 1997, years before it showed up in Canada and devastated that country's beef industry.

Posted by Robert Shull, 02:45:44 PM




Latest Entries by Theme

All Themes

Enforcement

About This Blog

Rollbacks

Safety

Industry Influence

Cost-Benefit Analysis

In Congress

Publications

Consumer Issues

Environment

Public Health

In the Courts

Oversight

In the White House

Most Recent Entries for RegWatch

Senate Moves Bill to Renew Federal Improvement Panel

After Preemption Row, Roof Strength Rule Delayed

Consumers Left in the Dark on Food Safety

Regulatory Attacks on Medicaid Halted

OMB Shutting Out EPA on CO2 Regulation

Bush Regulatory Gatekeepers on House Chopping Block

Lobbyists Opposing FDA Changes

It All Depends on Who You Ask

For Workplace Injuries, Underreporting is under Fire

Tomato Toll in the Thousands, CDC Says

Archived Entries for Consumer Issues

July

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004

October, 2004

September, 2004