In the News

Jason Schwartz, legal director for the New York University Institute for Policy Integrity, said the regulation of existing power plants would require EPA to work closely in partnership with the states, which would ultimately slow the regulation’s development.

The Clean Air Act “authorizes EPA to do a lot with respect to greenhouse gases” and also demands a great deal of the agency, said Jason Schwartz, the legal director at New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, the law school’s advocacy arm. Schwartz’s group is going to be looking for so-called market mechanisms that allow power plants to trade or borrow emission credits, for example.

The Clean Air Act “authorizes EPA to do a lot with respect to greenhouse gases” and also demands a great deal of the agency, said Jason Schwartz, the legal director at New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, the law school’s advocacy arm. Schwartz’s group is going to be looking for so-called market mechanisms that allow power plants to trade or borrow emission credits, for example.

The effort to calculate the value of lifesaving is a growing area of research among regulators and economists alike, says Michael Livermore of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University’s School of Law. The research enables “finer distinctions” about the cost that society is willing to bear to lower risks, he says.

Also today, the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University, which was quick to express support for Obama’s pick of Shelanski back in April, sent members of Congress a letter outlining a framework for discussion on OIRA’s rule reviews that it said could address concerns about undue regulatory delays while also balancing the need for thorough regulatory reviews.

According to Michael Livermore, executive director of the Institute for Policy Integrity, the legal requirement for cost-benefit analysis is at the heart of the issue. Beginning under the Reagan administration, proposed government regulations must be submitted to review by a little-known office called the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Environmentalists are launching an effort they hope will pressure the Obama administration to raise its default estimate of the social cost of carbon (SCC), believing it will strengthen the case for strict greenhouse gas (GHG) rules and other emission controls just as concerns about irreversible climate change due to the emissions are mounting.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Environmental Defense Fund and the Institute for Policy Integrity, a think tank based at the New York University School of Law, are developing a web-based platform to foster sharing of data between climate scientists and economists in an effort that proponents believe will help put pressure on the administration to raise its SCC estimate.

Has there been a shift in tone on regulation during President Obama’s second term? During today’s OnPoint, Michael Livermore, executive director at the Institute for Policy Integrity, discusses the politics of regulation as Congress works through the confirmation process for several key regulatory positions. Livermore also gives his take on how Howard Shelanski, the president’s nominee to head up the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, could affect the future of regulations coming out of this administration.

Cost-benefit analysis, while embraced by both political parties over the course of the past three decades, is still feared by many progressives in the United States. But as environmental concerns have spread around the world, this tool is lighting a path in many developing countries toward a new generation of environmental policies to protect public health, climate stability, and natural resources. This new role for cost-benefit analysis challenges the sometimes stale and suffocating way in which discussions over cost-benefit analysis are often framed here at home.

The Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law, a non-partisan think tank, issued a report Friday on the implementation of the Fair Housing Act that recommends that the Department of Housing and Urban Development more clearly define fair housing goals and measure the progress of local jurisdictions in meeting the requirements of the law. Click here for the report.

“Decades after the civil rights movement inspired the Fair Housing Act, HUD still has a long way to go before that law’s vision of fair housing is realized,” said Policy Integrity executive director, Michael Livermore, in a statement. “HUD should take steps to improve fairness and equality in housing markets.”