Institute for Policy Integrity logo

Twitter @policyintegrity

In the News

Viewing all news in Transparency
  • Jason Schwartz on Carbon Cutting Stateside

    March 10, 2010 – Planetshed Blog

    Under President Bush, not much happened at the federal level when it came to climate change. During that bleak time, environmentalists could at least look to the states for a glimmer of progress. States in several regions organized carbon cutting initiatives and proposed some moderate but important greenhouse gas reductions. These local, largely market-based programs could jump-start America’s climate efforts and prove to the nation that cap-and-trade is not a dirty word.

  • Is it a problem that more industry groups are meeting with key regulatory officials than enviros?

    March 8, 2010 – Grist

    A quick scan of OIRA’s public meeting records shows that, since President Obama took office, industry and trade associations have held many more meetings with OIRA than advocacy NGOs or unions-something like eight times as many. If OIRA were turning down greens in favor of business interests, this would be a major cause for concern. But, according to the folks in that office, they take every meeting requested to discuss regulations under review. That means the reason for the lopsided meeting log is a lack of requests from groups working for stronger protections.

  • Retaking Rationality featured in analysis of Obama’s improvements to regulatory agencies

    February 18, 2010 – The New Republic

    As Richard L. Revesz and Michael A. Livermore argue in a recent book, Retaking Rationality, there is nothing intrinsically illiberal about cost-benefit analysis. Indeed, it can be quite consistent with a progressive faith in social science.

  • Michael Livermore with an update on President Bush’s midnight regulations

    February 4, 2010 – Grist

    In the months leading up to President Obama’s inauguration, the Bush administration rushed through a raft of controversial regulations. These “midnight regulations,” like the one that would allow mining waste to be dumped into rivers and streams in West Virginia, caused a major stir at the time—but whatever happened to them? After a year in office, has the new president been able to clean up his predecessor’s last minute mess? The answer is a mixed bag of attempts, delays, successes, and road blocks.

  • Make the kids pay: The economic effects of climate change on future generations

    November 18, 2009 – Grist

    The debate over the economics of climate change boils down to that very calculation: how much are we willing to pay today to avoid climate risks in the future? The simple fact is that as we continue to use fuels that contribute to global warming today, we place major economic burdens on our kids and grandkids tomorrow.

  • What the CBO Isn’t Telling Congress: Climate Change Threatens Million of Jobs

    November 6, 2009 – Huffington Post

    In a survey of 144 top climate economists released November 4, 2009 by the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law, 84% agreed that “the environmental effects of greenhouse gas emissions, as described by leading scientific experts, create significant risks to important sectors of the United States and global economies.” A majority stated that sectors that will be negatively affected include agriculture, fishing, forestry, insurance, and health services.

  • Treasury Docs: Enviro Taxes Could Reach $400 Billion A Year

    September 18, 2009 –

    A dissenting view comes from NYU Law School’s Institute for Policy Integrity, which says in an “informal analysis” that the benefits of the House bill “could likely exceed the costs by as much as nine-to-one or more” — although the authors admit that any benefits would be global while the [sic] would be borne by Americans. One EPA estimate found a “$98 to $140 average annual cost per household.”

  • Should EPA Bow To Chamber’s Demand?

    September 1, 2009 – The National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts Blog

    EPA should not grant the Chamber of Commerce’s request for an extraordinary on-the-record proceeding concerning the agency’s expected endangerment finding. Rather than engage in this time consuming process of little value, the agency should move forward with much needed regulatory action that was grossly delayed by the political calculation of the last administration, even as the science connecting greenhouse gas emissions to severe environmental consequences has continued to mount.

  • Putting The “benefit” Back In Cost-benefit Analysis

    July 23, 2009 – The New Republic’s The Vine Blog

    The climate-change bill that passed the House last month and is currently being considered by the Senate represents America’s last chance to seriously address its contributions to global warming before we head to the international climate talks in Copenhagen this December. But the current legislative debate also offers an opportunity to reshape the broader conversation over the costs and benefits of environmental regulation—and environmentalists should not let the opportunity pass them by.

  • Livermore quoted on changes to EPA’s CBA guidelines (sub. req.).

    July 21, 2009 – Inside EPA’s Risk Policy Report

    The Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) at New York University, which generally supports expanded use of cost-benefit analysis, applauded the changes to the guidelines, and also pointed out that the SAB encouraged the use of cost-benefit analysis when looking at deregulatory or non-regulatory proposals. A source with the IPI says that, during the last administration, economic analysis was not conducted for many deregulatory actions, including changes to the new source review rules, which require new or modified sources to install strict pollution controls. The source says it is “important that the SAB realized the systemic problem about how cost-benefit analysis has been used in the past” by pointing out the need for analysis for deregulatory actions.