Senators call for regulatory cost-benefit studies

Federal agencies would have to conduct cost-benefit analyses and health, safety and environmental risk assessments before making major regulatory changes, under a bill introduced in the Senate Thursday.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., introduced the same bill in the last Congress. Under the bill (S. 746), agencies would be required to perform cost-benefit analyses for rules that would impose at least $100 million in compliance costs on private-sector firms. Risk assessments would also be required for major rules and would be subject to independent peer review. Peer review of cost-benefit analyses would also be required for rules costing at least $500 million.

The Clinton administration signaled its support for the bill last year after getting Thompson and Levin to agree to changes that the administration said would ensure the bill would not undermine health or environmental protections nor add significant costs or delays to the regulatory process.

Business groups, state governments and local governments have all voiced their support for the bill. Unions and environmental groups, meanwhile, oppose it on grounds that it may slow down the regulatory process and weaken federal protections.

Last year, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., prevented the bill from making headway after criticizing it as too weak. House and Senate Democrats argued that it was too tough.

"I've fought for regulatory reform since I came to the Senate in 1979," Levin said in a statement. "We need an open regulatory process and one that utilizes good science and common sense to improve the quality of our regulations."