Regulatory: The Obama Regulatory Agenda After the Elections
How the shift in power in the House of Representatives will affect the Obama Administration's initiatives.
November 02, 2010 at 08:00 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Republican capture of control of the House of Representatives has changed the mechanisms through which the Obama Administration will pursue its regulatory policy objectives and ensures that disputes between the political parties over regulations will be a recurring feature of the run-up to the 2012 elections.
Until November 2nd, the President led by obtaining landmark legislation from a Congress dominated by his party, and he had little need for concern about legislative oversight of his Administration's initiatives. The President has now lost the opportunity to obtain legislation granting him broad additional authority. He will have to advance his policies through unilateral Executive Branch actions, such as issuance of regulations, executive orders, heightened enforcement and aggressive interpretation of existing laws. The heads of Executive agencies also will have to reallocate their time and political capital to defend the inevitable House oversight hearings on controversial programs.
Initial efforts to implement the health care and financial services regulatory reform bill have shown that many provisions were imperfectly drafted and could have substantial unintended consequences that would harm the public interest. Unfortunately, the prospect of obtaining passage of technical corrections legislation has now evaporated, because the legislative effort would reopen old policy disputes over core policy decisions in those bills, without providing a realistic opportunity to cure the problems that have been revealed. The agencies charged with implementing these measures will have to use their authority to address these anomalies as best they can, and to use other techniques such as long phase-in periods and forbearance of enforcement to give regulated entities extensive grace periods to transition their businesses to the new regime.
The Administration's regulatory policy is likely to be a major bone of contention between the White House and Republicans in the new Congress. The focus likely will be the Environmental Protection Agency. In the years preceding the election of President Reagan, Republicans persuaded the public that EPA's efforts to regulate carcinogenic chemicals were needlessly restricting economic growth. At the mid-term, EPA is in the process of issuing an extraordinary number of very expensive rules, including four major Green House Gas rules; regulations that will force technology development to reduce emissions and increase mileage for autos, SUVs, and large trucks; and major upgrades in air pollution controls for electric power plants and other large industrial facilities. In this climate, similar political confrontations are virtually inevitable.
The President would veto any direct effort by Congress to invoke its formal authority under 5 U.S.C. ? 801 to disapprove a final EPA rule. Accordingly, the battle likely will be joined over Republican efforts to deny agencies the appropriations necessary to finalize or implement their rules. For example, the House will try to package measures to defund EPA with spending measures that are attractive to Democratic constituencies, thereby ratcheting up the political price that Democratic Senators up for reelection would pay for opposing these measures and that the President would pay for vetoing an omnibus spending bill. How successfully Republicans can pursue this strategy remains to be determined, however, because their leadership is determined not to precipitate a shutdown of the government over appropriations. That approach proved to be a disaster for Republicans in 1995-96 and contributed importantly to President Clinton's ability to recover from his defeat in the 1994 and ultimately to win reelection.
John F. Cooney is a partner in the Washington, D.C., office of Venable.
Read John Cooney's previous column. Read John Cooney's next column.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhy Seemingly Simple Off-Channel Communication Rules Still Vex Finance Industry
5 minute readSEC Enforcement Chief Grewal—Whose Hard Line on Crypto Tormented the Industry—Stepping Down
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250