Institute for Policy Integrity logo

In the News

Viewing all news in Opinion
  • Should Fossil-Fuel Companies Bear Responsibility for the Damage Their Products Do to the Environment?

    When companies produce and sell harmful products, even if the full extent of the danger isn’t initially clear, they should pay to help remedy the damage done. Whatever challenges are involved in arriving at those solutions shouldn’t be mistaken for reasons to let fossil-fuel companies off the hook.

  • Trump’s EPA Chooses Rodents Over People

    The agency will curtail its reliance on animal testing, putting public health at risk.

  • Getting Energy Storage Policies Right

    At its full potential, energy storage will improve grid efficiency and resilience, while helping to reduce emissions. But if we don’t get the accompanying policies right, we risk falling short of these improvements.

  • EPA Will Say Anything to Avoid Addressing Climate Change

    Pay no attention to the premature deaths behind the curtain. That is the upshot of the analysis supporting the Environmental Protection Agency’s so-called Affordable Clean Energy rule, which public health groups are challenging in a lawsuit filed earlier this month.

  • More Bike Lanes, Not Just Post-Tragedy

    Protected bike lanes, which make streets safer for both pedestrians and bikers, can improve the situation tremendously. But city officials and Community Boards have refused to follow through with a comprehensive approach to installing and enforcing bike lanes, creating dangerous conditions in neighborhoods all around the city.

  • It’s a Bad Idea to Pick a Fight with California on Car Emissions

    Though standards limiting vehicle emissions have played a critical role in controlling U.S. air pollution, the Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration have imminent plans to roll back emissions standards for model years 2021 and beyond. As part of the proposal, the agencies have put California in their crosshairs. But leaving California alone could help keep the air cleaner and avoid the political and legal uncertainty caused by picking that fight with California.

  • The Trump Administration Might Be Too Incompetent to Undermine Environmental Regulations

    The Trump administration appears to be entering an alarming new stage of its attack on environmental protection. EPA has recently decided it will change the way it collects and processes data, to provide better justification to dismantle the analytical foundation of its rules.The consequences for the environment and public health could be disastrous. But even as this approach might be more deliberate, these actions are unlikely to survive court challenges as well.

  • On Balance: The Costs and Benefits of Deregulation

    Administrative agencies, courts, and litigants are just coming off two years of intense debates over the legality of agency deregulation through delay. One fascinating development has been how significant cost-benefit analysis has been in these debates. Cost-benefit analysis has formed the basis for several important court losses suffered by the administration. Now agencies have proposed to repeal many big-ticket rules, including the Clean Power Plan, the Clean Water Rule, and vehicle emissions standards. A key question is what role cost-benefit analysis will play in the upcoming legal battles over repeals.

  • Clutching to Fossil Fuels, and Losing, in the Era of Climate Change

    Together, these court decisions amount to a stunning defeat of the “energy dominance” agenda and reveal that the Trump administration cannot operate outside the bounds of the law.

  • Regulatory Whack-A-Mole

    Despite the Trump administration's low success rate, the administration is actually winning — at least some of the time. That’s because the administration has learned to use delaying tactics to undermine and even repeal federal regulations it doesn’t like, even when judges rule against it in court.