Cost/Benefit Analysis of Regulations


“Campaigning and politics has become a huge industry and what sounds great during the campaign is different than how you govern,” said Senator Mark Pryor [D-AR].  At the ACA 2012 Summit, he suggested that “We need a new paradigm [in Washington politics].”  The problems in Washington are fixable, but politicians must, “Be willing to come to the middle to get things done.”  He said that the “people” must demand bi-partisan governance, if things are going to change.

In this video interview, filmed as he was rushing to a vote, Senator Pryor briefly explains a bipartisan, bicameral piece of legislation introduced by Senators Pryor and Portman [R-OH] and Representatives Coble [R-NC] and Peterson [D-MN] intended to reduce the cost of regulation and, by extension, help improve job creation.  The bill promises to bring those who are being regulated into the discussion before the regulations are passed.   The regulators must also show that a particular rule is the  “least costly way” to meet the objective.  Similarly, under this proposed legislation, the regulators must do a cost/benefit analysis; which is currently not allowed by some statutes.

In his comments to ACA Summit attendees, Pryor also emphasized the importance of broadband infrastructure.  He suggested that  cyber-security laws need updating and that ACA members should be part of that process.

ACA Coverage brought to you by the ACA and ViodiTV.