Mass, Computer-Generated, and Fraudulent Comments
The Administrative Conference of the United States requested proposals for a new project on “Mass, Computer-Generated, and Fraudulent Comments."
Publications
The GW Regulatory Studies Center scholars regularly conduct applied research to understand regulatory policy and practice from a public interest perspective. Our content often takes the form of public interest comments, formal testimony, working papers, policy insights, and short commentaries analyzing the most pressing issues in regulatory policy. View the rest of our material by the different types of publications listed on this page or our research areas.
What We Publish
Journal Articles & Working Papers
Long-form publications intended for academic audiences that take a deep dive into a particular aspect of regulatory policy.
Public Comments & Testimonies
Scholarly analysis of the potential effects of particular rulemakings from federal agencies, and advice to Congress on how to improve the rulemaking process.
Commentaries & Insights
Short-form publications intended for all audiences which provide easy to access analysis of regulatory policy.
Books & Reports
Formal publications, often completed with other leading organizations and individuals, providing a thorough understanding of regulations and the rulemaking process.
Newsletters
The weekly Regulation Digest contains everything you need to know about regulatory policy today, and our monthly Center Update gives you all of the latest from our team.
For accessible charts and supporting data that you can use in your own publications or presentations, visit the Reg Stats page.
Latest Publications
Improvements in SEC Economic Analysis
Several D.C. Circuit decisions that remanded regulations to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) between 2005 and 2011 provide a natural experiment that permits researchers to identify the correlation between judicial review, the quality of regulatory agencies’ economic analysis, and its use in regulatory decisions. SEC economic analysis improved substantially following the issuance of new staff guidance on economic analysis in 2012.
Analyzing Agency Budgets for Regulatory Spending
This Regulatory Insight analyzes four Trump administration budget proposals to identify notable recurring trends in regulatory spending. Budget data indicate that spending on homeland security regulation has risen, while outlays for environment and energy regulation have fallen. Comparing the president’s budget proposals with actual outlays suggests where the administration has been largely successful in accomplishing its political goals and where Congress has hindered those goals.
The public comment process offers a way to place evidence in an agency’s record that it might not otherwise consider, such as race-related effects.
OMB's original guidance on discounting from 1988 can help to resolve many misunderstandings about discounting that have developed since then.
Benefit-Cost Analysis at the EPA
“The EPA is “soliciting comment on whether and how EPA should promulgate regulations that provide a consistent and transparent interpretation relating to the consideration of weighing costs and benefits in making regulatory decisions in a manner consistent with applicable authorizing statutes.” I will comment on three issues raised in the proposed EPA rule.
In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), EPA seeks to codify procedures that will ensure adequate consistency and transparency in applying Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) to rulemakings under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Regulators' Budget: Overall Spending and Staffing Remain Stable
This report is a joint effort of the Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government, and Public Policy at Washington University in St. Louis and the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center in Washington, DC. This report is one in a series designed to enhance the understanding of the impact of federal regulation on society and does not represent an official position of either the George Washington University or Washington University in St. Louis.
The Durability of Regulatory Oversight
This article reflects on OIRA's evolution over the almost 40 years since the Paperwork Reduction Act created it in 1980 to understand what has made it so durable. It finds that regardless of their philosophy, presidents need an entity like OIRA to address the principal‐agent problem they face in managing the disparate agencies within the executive branch.