 |
LITIGATION
» Access to Courts and Court Remedies
» Campaign Finance and Election Laws
» Constitutional Rights and Requirements
» Health, Safety, and Environment
» Open Government and Open Courts
Currently Featured Topics
Government Transparency
Consumer Justice
First Amendment
Health, Safety and the Environment
SUPREME COURT |
OMB Peer Review Proposal Threatens Regulatory Science
|
John Graham, the Administrator of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), is attempting to impose White House control on regulatory science through requirements for mandatory peer review prior to dissemination of information by federal agencies. Last September, OIRA issued a draft peer review proposal that shocked the scientific and academic communities by labeling as biased all potential peer review panel members who receive public funds for their research, while minimizing the conflict of interest posed by receipt of funding from regulated industries. In response to widespread outcry against the proposal from a bipartisan group of former high-level regulatory officials, members of Congress, and numerous public interest, scientific and academic organizations, OIRA issued a revised draft in April that tones down somewhat the overt political control and stark pro-industry bias of the original. However, the revised draft bulletin still lacks adequate protection against political influence and industry pressure. No need has been demonstrated for government-wide mandatory peer review procedures which will lead to unnecessary and costly delay in the development of needed new safeguards. Unfortunately, impeding health, safety and environmental protections appears to be the true intent behind the proposal. |
|
Copyright © 2010 Public Citizen. All rights reserved. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen. |
Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation
| Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen. Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site. You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible. |
To become a member of Public Citizen, click here. |