See How It Works!
US148 - Cost of Environmental Regulatory Process
| Ensure that environmental laws properly account for cost in regulatory process | |
|
|
|
   
|
|
Description
Source: mittromney.com
Arguments
Essential environmental protection does not require destroying jobs, infringing on property rights, or curtailing freedom. Insisting on a basic cost-benefit analysis for regulations will restore an appropriate balance and common sense to environmental policy.
Source: garyjohnson2012.com
To protect a lizard, the Obama administration is trying to stop oil and gas exploration in West Texas. Even more ominously, if the Obama administration succeeds in banning hydraulic fracturing – which has opened vast new reserves of oil and gas – tens of thousands of jobs will be lost and America will be left even more dependent on foreign dictators for our energy needs.
Source: tedcruz.org
Counterarguments
The problem with this idea is that your idea of proper accounting for cost is probably not the same as mine. That "proper accounting for cost" is a good idea is a truism. I do suspect, however, that our administrative agencies should develop stronger frameworks for rational decision-making. This would involve defining performance metrics, projecting possible scenarios, and evaluating options explicitly through a cost/benefit/risk model.
0 Topics
Discussion
No comments have been submitted for this idea
Related Ideas
| Obama-era laws and regulations must be rolled back, and pre-existing ones must be carefully scrutinized More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Rational and streamlined approach to regulation to facilitate the development of oil, natural gas, and nuclear resources More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Require an analysis of the impact on jobs and families of all new proposed regulations before they go into effect More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
