FEDERALhearing transcript

Senate Hearing: Improving Transparency in How Agencies Use Science

Original title: AGENCY USE OF SCIENCE IN THE RULEMAKING PROCESS: PROPOSALS FOR IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

January 1, 2017

regulatory policy scientific research government transparency rulemaking accountability

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing explores potential changes to federal standards for scientific evidence, which could alter the data requirements for future environmental, health, and safety regulations.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Federal Regulatory Agencies

These agencies may be subject to new standards for how they evaluate and document the scientific evidence used in their rulemaking processes.

Scientific Research Community

Researchers may face new requirements for data transparency and reproducibility if their work is used to support federal regulations.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2017.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This Senate subcommittee hearing examined how federal agencies use scientific data to create new regulations. The discussion focused on proposals to ensure that the information used by agencies is transparent, , and .

Key Facts

The hearing took place on March 9, 2017, in the Dirksen Senate Office Building.
The subcommittee is reviewing how federal agencies select and utilize scientific information for regulatory decision-making.
Proposed criteria for 'best available information' include independent peer review, reproducibility of results, and public availability of data.
The hearing is part of a multi-year review of the federal rulemaking process by the subcommittee.
Witnesses included representatives from academic, scientific advocacy, and industry policy organizations.

Why It Matters

The hearing explores potential changes to federal standards for scientific evidence, which could alter the data requirements for future environmental, health, and safety regulations.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the goal of this hearing?

To discuss ways to improve the transparency and accountability of the scientific data used by federal agencies when they write new rules.

What criteria were suggested for evaluating scientific data?

Suggestions included ensuring data is , , transparent, and publicly available.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Focus on Reproducibility

The hearing highlights a shift toward prioritizing 'reproducibility' as a mandatory standard for scientific data in federal rulemaking.

Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management

Connected Entities

personAndrew A. Rosenberg“Director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scien”Map →

organizationSubcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management“Senate subcommittee conducting the hearing”Map →

personNancy Beck“Senior Director of Regulatory Science Policy at the American Chemistry Council”Map →

personSusan Dudley“Director of the Regulatory Studies Center at The George Washington University”Map →

personJames Lankford“Chairman of the Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100

Significance65
How much this matters to a regular citizen
Controversy40
Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
Entertainment10
Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
Buzz20
Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools