Paul Tonko: “I oppose this amendment which requires that an agency publish a list of scientific information relating to a rule or…”

“I oppose this amendment which requires that an agency publish a list of scientific information relating to a rule or expected to relate to the rule for each rule that an agency expects to propose for the following year. I am concerned that this amendment would create unintended consequences and operate as a one-way ratchet to slow down and stop the rulemaking process by requiring burdensome disclosures and creating options for procedural gridlock. Agencies are already required to publish relevant data in support of a rule during these rulemaking processes. Rules that do not appear to be based on a reasoned analysis of relevant data may be vacated by reviewing courts as arbitrary or capricious. Moreover, data acquired through federally funded research is already accessible to researchers who have a legitimate purpose. I am also concerned that because this amendment does not define scientific information or clarify the scope of this publication requirement, peer reviewed materials may be taken out of context or otherwise misused for political purposes. In so doing, this requirement may chill feedback in the scientific community, undermine agencies' ability to adopt the best rules possible, or otherwise manufacture delays in the rulemaking process. Any additional requirements in this area should strengthen, rather than weaken, the process of science-based rulemaking. Given these concerns, I urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. Mr.…”