Builders often join the chorus of small business owners
complaining that government regulations stunt their willingness or ability to
create jobs. These same builders, then, are likely to be watching closely how
the Obama administration responds to an open letter it received on Nov. 1 from Small Businesses for
Sensible Regulations, a project of the Nashville-based National Federation of Independent
Business, urging reforms that would ease the regulatory process for smaller
companies.
NFIB has 350,000 members, and as of Friday morning 968 of
those members had signed up to support the sensible regulations coalition,
according to the trade group’s website, which allows users to sign and email a
personalized message to the president, vice president, and their congressional
representatives.
The project, in essence, reiterates familiar themes that the
business community has been harping on for years:
•Give small businesses more of a voice in the regulatory
process.
•Before assessing penalties, give small businesses more help
to comply with new regulations.
•Subject new regulations to “rigorous” cost-benefit analyses
before enacting them.
•Base all new regulations on “objective data and hard
science.”
•Require that the regulatory process have more transparency
and accountability.
“We view this letter as a guidepost,” Kevan Chapman, an NFIB
spokesman, tells Builder. As the presidential election year approaches,
the group “is trying to ratchet up the pressure and make [regulatory reform] a
bigger deal.” While he concedes the administration has already delayed or
rolled back some rules, “there’s tons of room for improvement.”
Chapman is quick to note that NFIB is not advocating
rollbacks in “major” environmental protection for public health and safety,
unlike some Republican presidential hopefuls who are calling for a neutering of
theU.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. However, Chapman claims that agencies like EPA and theOccupational Safety and Health
Administration “tend to act quickly on their own” without what NFIB
considers to be adequate assessment of how rules being imposed affect
businesses.
He says a prime example of this is EPA’s National Ambient
Air Quality Standard for ozone, which includes rules for significantly reducing
sulphur and nitrogen oxide pollutants across state borders, mercury pollutants
from power plants, and carbon pollutants from cars and trucks. In July, EPA had
proposed a timeline for implementation of final standards under which the
states, by December 2013, would file State Implementation Plans that would
outline how the states would reduce pollution to meet the new standards. The
states would have been required to meet the new primary standard under
deadlines that began in 2014 and ended in 2031.
However, under pressure from business groups and
Republicans, The White House in September suddenly instructed EPA to kill
its draft for the new ozone standard. Obama said at the time that his
decision was in line of his efforts to reduce regulatory burdens on business.
The EPA plans to propose revisions to its rule by 2013.
Chapman says the coalition wants to see more such rules
subjected to scrutiny by the Small
Business Administration under the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980,
which gives SBA the authority to weigh in forcefully on the impact of new
regulations on businesses. Chapman implies this act isn’t effective enough
because “there’s no enforcement, accountability, or oversight” of government
agencies.
The “transparency” that NFIB’s project calls for, explains
Chapman, boils down to “the justification and the thought process behind some
of these regulations, and why they are being created.”
Source: builderonline.com