Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

In the News

Viewing all news in Jobs and Regulation
  • Trump Stretches Meaning of Deregulation in Touting Achievements

    December 29, 2017 – Bloomberg

    In the Dec. 14 press conference, Trump said the government had taken 67 deregulatory actions through Sept. 30 — with an annual savings to society of $570 million — and had imposed just three new regulations. The administration’s cost figures ignore projected benefits for regulations it has blocked, distorting the actual impacts on society, said Denise Grab, a lawyer with the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University’s School of Law.

  • Job-Killing Regulations: The Elephant Not in the Room

    August 16, 2017 – The Huffington Post

    The Institute for Policy Integrity in 2017 issued a fact sheet highlighting their conclusion that “regulations have little effect on aggregate employment or unemployment rates.” Since studies often rely upon models to predict effects on jobs, the fact sheet also emphasized that “job analysis models can easily be manipulated to predict either job losses or gains.”

  • Trump’s Executive Order Is a Gift to Coal Executives. It Won’t Do Anything for Coal Miners.

    March 29, 2017 – Vox

    Now there’s a window of opportunity for coal companies. Lifting the moratorium, says Jayni Foley Hein of the Institute for Policy Integrity, “will allow new lease sales to go forward using the same outdated minimum bids, rental rates, and stagnant royalty rates that have been used for decades.”

  • Do Environmental Regulations Reduce Employment? Not Really.

    March 2, 2017 – Vox

    In his Tuesday night speech, President Donald Trump made reference to regulations that have killed American jobs. But, at least in the case of the environmental regulations Trump is specifically attacking, it isn’t true. And in timely fashion, the Institute for Policy Integrity has a new brief with a clear and succinct explanation why this is so.

  • A Subtle Attack on the Environment

    March 2, 2017 – U.S. News & World Report (Opinion)

    President Donald Trump and newly confirmed EPA administrator Scott Pruitt appear poised to make sweeping environmental policy changes. But strong environmental regulations remain widely popular. Perhaps as a result, the Trump administration may take a subtle approach in attacking environmental rules. Pruitt and other administration officials appear interested in rewriting guidelines for regulatory analysis and they could cook the books so that environmental protections appear to have few or no benefits and exaggerated costs. The results would be sinister, undermining many current and future safeguards for the environment, workplace safety and other important social issues.

  • Finding Common Ground in a Sea of Corporate Regulation

    February 7, 2017 – NPR (MPR News - Audio)

    Immediately after his inauguration, President Trump met with business leaders telling them he hopes to cut regulation. What does this mean for corporate growth and consumers? How do voters on the left and the right view these changes and is there common ground to be found? MPR chief economics commentator Chris Farrell spoke with Michael Mandel at the Progressive Policy Institute in Washington and Richard Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU School of Law.

  • Trump on Jobs Report: ‘It’s Going to Continue, Big League’

    February 3, 2017 – Associated Press

    “The order is extremely vague, and it could easily lead to agency gridlock and regulatory uncertainty,” said Richard Revesz, director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University’s School of Law.

  • Obama Announces Moratorium on New Federal Coal Leases

    January 15, 2016 – The Washington Post

    “This is a major shift that helps modernize the federal coal program,” said Jayni Hein, policy director at the Institute for Policy Integrity. “This planning process will disclose the environmetal and social impacts of coal leasing, which are extensive.”

  • Analyzing the Job Impacts of Regulation

    April 15, 2014 – Penn Program on Regulation RegBlog

    As the United States struggles with a high unemployment rate in the wake of the Great Recession, it is worth examining carefully the relationship between jobs and regulation, as well as possible policy responses to it. A recent panel discussion held at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania sought to do just that. The panel, organized around the recent publication of the book “Does Regulation Kill Jobs?,” showed how difficult it is to find any evidence to support claims that regulations systematically kill jobs. Political rhetoric notwithstanding, the book’s introductory chapter states that “the existing empirical research suggests that regulation does relatively little to reduce or increase overall jobs in the United States.” Richard L. Revesz, Lawrence King Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus at New York University Law School, recognized the challenges currently associated with estimating the employment effects of regulation. But he noted that economists and policy analysts have successfully overcome similar methodological challenges in estimating risks and the costs and benefits of regulation more generally. With a concerted effort at additional research and analysis, he argued, agencies could do a better job of developing reliable estimates of job impacts, which would be better than allowing these effects to continue to be exaggerated in political discourse.

  • Cornyn, Cruz slam Obama’s new climate change agenda as ‘killing jobs’

    July 1, 2013 – San Antonio Express Texas on the Potomac Blog

    Richard Revesz, the director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University, oversaw a comprehensive overview of 25 studies of the impact of environmental policy on employment in 2012 that largely indicated no net job losses from tougher regulations.