As Reg•Watch has reported, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) has been absolutely abysmal in enforcing the MINER Act. Congress passed the MINER Act in the wake of the Sago and Darby mine tragedies and included some statutory deadlines. MSHA has failed to promulgate any meaningful standards related to the MINER Act.

Rep. George Miller (D-CA) has been displeased with MSHA and yesterday his committee, the House Education and Labor Committee, held an oversight hearing.

But the blame should not fall entirely to MSHA. J. Davitt McAteer, a former MSHA administrator and current VP of Wheeling Jesuit University (go Cardinals!), spoke of the muddied waters of our federal regulatory system:

In the best of circumstances, promulgating a new health or safety standard takes 2-3 years to complete. However, when the rule was substantial and/or controversial, it can take 4, 6, 8 or more years from start to finish. In the worst of cases, the procedural maneuvering completely obstructs the process…

The public policy considerations embodied in the Federal Administrative Procedure Act, Presidential Executive Order 12866, the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Information Quality Act of 2001, and their amendments and implementation documents as well as other requirements have suffocated the public health and precautionary values embodied in the statutes governing, among others, MSHA and OSHA. The harsh reality is that those interest groups, which have a stake in avoiding or postponing new workplace rules, have the financial resources and political clout to impede and/or bog down the current rulemaking system.

Be sure to check out the latest issue of our biweekly newsletter, The Watcher. Regulatory policy articles this time:

OSHA's Lack of Standard Setting under Fire

White House Tightens Grip on Regulatory Power Grab

House Subcommittee Steps Up Oversight on Regulatory Changes

In March, Reg•Watch blogged about Julie MacDonald, one of the Bush administration's political minions who was manipulating environmental science to meet political ends. Yesterday, the Interior Department announced MacDonald's resignation.

Interior is right to hold MacDonald accountable for her transgressions, but, as The New York Times reports, the move comes as the House Natural Resources Committee prepares to hold an oversight hearing next week on scientific integrity.

Reg•Watch hopes MacDonald isn't just a sacrificial lamb. Union of Concerned Scientists Scientific Integrity Program Director Francesca Grifo welcomes the move, but also realizes MacDonald "represents a much larger problem of widespread political interference at federal agencies."

The Bush administration should not always be on the defensive in reacting to violations of scientific integrity. Senior officials should take a proactive approach to weeding out those pushing political agendas in lieu of faithfully serving the public.