NHTSA's Safety Standards for Child Restraint Systems-Side Impact Protection
This public interest comment on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s proposed rule setting side-impact requirements for child restraint systems is part of a new project to evaluate how well agencies are preparing for retrospective review and analysis of regulations.
Retrospective Review: Do Agencies’ Proposals Measure Up?
As part of our continuing focus on retrospective review of regulations, the GW Regulatory Studies Center is commencing a new initiative, the Retrospective Review Comment Project. Through this project, we will examine significant proposed regulations to assess whether they include plans for conducting retrospective review, and submit comments to provide suggestions on how best to incorporate plans for retrospective review when new regulations are issued.
Flash Boys, the latest book from Michael Lewis (author of Liar’s Poker, Moneyball, The Blind Side, The Big Short, etc.), is a nonfictional account of the development of high-frequency trading (HFT) in U.S. equity markets, and of Brad Katsuyama’s quest to reform the system by creating a new trading platform, IEX, designed to resist the most damaging HFT strategies.
Measuring the Impact of Public Comments
How much affect on the substance of agency regulations do public comments have?
NLRB's Representation Case Procedures
In this NPRM, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) proposes to amend existing rules governing the procedures by which representation cases are conducted.
Timeliness of OIRA Reviews: A Snapshot in Time
To gain insight into ongoing reviews, we can turn to RegInfo.gov to get a snapshot of how long the regulations currently at OIRA have been under review.
Australia's Regulatory "Bonfire"
According to the World Economic Forum, Australia's labor regulations and red tape are major problems for doing business in the country.
Rulemaking Ossification Is Real: A Response to Testing the Ossification Thesis
Jason & Susan Yackee engage in an empirical study and claim to find relatively weak evidence that ossification is neither a serious or widespread problem. After a review of the Yackee’s methodology, dataset, time period, and suggestion of appropriate normative criteria, I conclude that nothing in the Yackee’s study contradicts or undermines the ossification hypothesis. In fact, ossification is a real problem that has a wide variety of serious adverse effects.
