DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Citizen V. Trump

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

VOL. 37, NO. 2 MARCH/APRIL 2017 NEWS After 15 Public Citizen v. Trump Years, BY RHODA FENG tion of at least two other rules, “If implemented, the order would ince President Donald Trump yielding a net cost of $0, and with- result in lasting damage to our Public Stook office, he has put regula- out consideration of the benefits government’s ability to save lives, tions — and the federal agencies afforded by the rules. In practice, protect our environment, police Citizen Wins that issue these vital public safe- this order will weaken, deter or Wall Street, keep consumers safe guards — squarely in his crosshairs. delay federal agencies from issu- and fight discrimination.” Rule to Prevent Parroting the talking points of ing new health, safety, environ- The complaint, filed in the U.S. big corporations, he has errone- Beryllium Deaths ously claimed that regulations cost jobs and dampen business “No one thinking sensibly about how to set rules for health, BY RHODA FENG ingenuity. safety, the environment and the economy would ever fter years of fighting for stron- Trump is dead wrong. So when issue this executive order. The goal is clearly to confer Ager protections from beryllium exposure, workers and organiza- on Jan. 30 he issued an executive enormous benefits on big business.” order arbitrarily directing that tions who have advocated on their federal agencies could issue new —Robert Weissman, president of Public Citizen behalf have achieved a long over- regulations only if they repealed due victory — though one with a two, Public Citizen took action to somewhat uncertain future. block the order. mental, consumer finance and District Court for the District of More than 15 years ago, Public On Feb. 8, Public Citizen, joined worker protections. Columbia, names as defendants Citizen petitioned for stronger by the Natural Resources Defense “No one thinking sensibly the president, the acting director protections for workers exposed Council and the Communications about how to set rules for health, of the Office of Management and to toxic levels of beryllium in a Workers of America, sued the safety, the environment and the Budget (OMB) and the current or variety of workplace settings. Trump administration over the economy would ever issue this acting secretaries and directors Finally, in January 2017, the U.S. executive order. executive order. The goal is clearly of more than a dozen executive Occupational Safety and Health The deregulatory Executive to confer enormous benefits on departments and agencies. Administration (OSHA) adopted a Order requires the cost of new big business,” Public Citizen The suit alleges that the agen- new rule to protect workers from rules to be offset by the elimina- President Robert Weissman said. see Lawsuit, page 13 see Beryllium, page 16 The Republican War on Regulation BY DAVID ROSEN is being waged on several fronts simultane- resident Donald Trump, his Cabinet of ously. On each front, Public Citizen is leading Pbillionaire robber barons and the corpo- the fight to defend public protections and the rate-backed Republican Congress are trying regulatory process from these unprecedented to plunder our nation’s wealth and resources assaults on public health and safety, our wal- by dismantling public protections, rigging lets and workplaces, and our environment. the rules for their own personal benefit Upon assuming office, Trump temporarily and unleashing big corporations to prey on suspended federal regulatory activity, some- American workers, consumers and families. thing recent presidents have done. But on Jan. The GOP’s war on regulation is payback 30, he signed an executive order requiring the for billions of dollars in corporate campaign repeal of two public protections for every spending on behalf of Republican candidates new one issued — forcing federal agencies to during the past several election cycles, and it see Regulation, page 8 INSIDE ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED CORPORATECABINET.ORG TRACKS TRUMP CABINET PICKS, page 5 SEVEN YEARS LATER, THE FOUNDATION OF CITIZENS UNITED IS IN RUINS, page 10 IN THIS ISSUE GET TO KNOW PUBLIC CITIZEN VOL. 37, NO. 2 • MARCH/APRIL 2017 RICK CLAYPOOL An ongoing series profiling DEMOCRACY Public Citizen leaders and staffers 5 CorporateCabinet.org tracks Trump Cabinet picks 6 Nondisclosure agreements concealed congressional staff work on ick Claypool is the research director for poverty organization in Pittsburgh, Pa. I was Muslim ban RPublic Citizen’s president’s office. He has drawn to Public Citizen’s dedication to stand- 10 In touting Ivanka Trump products, worked at Public Citizen for nearly nine years, ing up to politicians and corporations that pri- Kellyanne Conway crosses legal line previously serving in various roles in the com- oritize private profit over the public interest. 11 Public Citizen’s January 21 munications department and the Congress That was nearly nine years ago, about a month democracy teach-In Watch division. Growing up in a family of before the 2008 financial crisis. I’ve been in the steelworkers in a working-class town in west- thick of it ever since. GLOBALIZATION & TRADE ern Pennsylvania, he witnessed firsthand the Can you share with us a fun/interesting fact 4 Will a Trump renegotiation of NAFTA economic devastation brought on by corporate most people don’t know about your work? make it better – or worse? globalization. Claypool has a bachelor’s degree in English and a master’s degree in popular Claypool: I once wound up at a charity dinner LITIGATION culture studies. When Claypool isn’t doing in- sitting next to a politician I’d criticized pretty depth investigations on corruption and cor- sharply about a week earlier. He was on the 1 Public Citizen v. Trump porate power, he spends time with his family radio defending himself from what I’d said. But HEALTH & SAFETY and writes fiction. His debut novel is slated for at the dinner, we got along, exchanged a few release later this year. words. Pretty soon the politician started taking 1 After 15 years, Public Citizen wins a better position on the issue. I don’t think I Please tell us about your role at Public Citizen. rule to prevent beryllium deaths was the only reason he came around, but I like Claypool: As research director for the presi- to think I helped. GOVERNMENT & dent’s office, I do in-depth investigations into FINANCIAL REFORM a number of our issues. Some of the issues I What issues appeal to you most? come back to again and again are money in Claypool: Generally, I like knocking down the 1 The Republican war on regulation politics, drug pricing and corporate influ- barriers that corporate interests have erected 10 Seven years later, the foundation of ence in government. As you might expect, against policies that actually help people. So Citizens United is in ruins these concerns have taken on a new urgency money in politics reforms, improving the regu- under President Trump — especially corporate latory system and ensuring that corporations PUBLIC CITIZEN RECOMMENDS influence. Trump’s corporate Cabinet plus can be held accountable via the criminal justice 15 ‘Weapons of Math Destruction’ Congress’ bloodthirst for deregulation means system appeal to me. And I will fight forever 15 ‘The Populist Explosion’ I’m working every day to help arm Public for single-payer health care. Citizen and our members and supporters with What do you enjoy doing in your free time? information to resist destructive policies that, OTHER Claypool: I hang out with my amazing wife left unchecked, would let reckless corporations and son and a cat named Chomsky. I cook. 2 Get to Know Public Citizen rip off consumers, pollute our environment, I drink hoppy beers. I’m kind of addicted to 3 President’s View exploit workers and harm patients. This is the “Adventure Time,” this ridiculous show on 7 Riding into the sunset fight of our lives. Cartoon Network. I’m constantly reading. 11 In memoriam: Clarence Ditlow What led you to Public Citizen? And I write. My first book, a weird science fic- 12 Public Citizen in your state Claypool: Before Public Citizen, I did investiga- tion novel about a safety inspector who joins a 13 Andrea Strong receives 14th annual tive reporting for an alternative newsweekly in resistance movement against a corporate city- Phyllis McCarthy public interest service Toledo, Ohio, and worked for a grassroots anti- state, is coming out later this year. award 14 In the Spotlight 15 Public Citizen Crossword 1600 20TH ST. NW, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009 • (202) 588-1000 • [email protected] • WWW.CITIZEN.ORG Public Citizen is a national non- PRESIDENT profit membership organization Robert Weissman ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS based in Washington, D.C. Since EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT its founding by Ralph Nader in Margrete Strand Rangnes Angela Bradbery, communications director 1971, Public Citizen has fought VICE PRESIDENT OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS for corporate and government Rick Claypool, research director Lisa Gilbert accountability to guarantee Katie Downey, communications intern the individual’s right to safe products, a healthy environ- PUBLIC CITIZEN INC. BOARD OF DIRECTORS Jason Adkins (chair), Joan Claybrook, Andrew S. Friedman, Rhoda Feng, editor ment and workplace, fair trade, and clean and safe energy sources. Public Citizen is active in Congress, the courts and Danny Goldberg, Jim Hightower, Joy Howell, Shannon Karilyn Gower, press officer government agencies. Liss-Riordan, John Richard, Anthony So, Robert Weissman (ex officio) Caroline Krauss, communications intern Public Citizen does not accept government or corporate grants. Our funding comes from our supporters through- PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Bartlett Naylor, financial policy advocate out the country, who believe there should be full-time Mark Chavez (chair), Jim Bildner, Ann Brown, Robert C. Fellmeth, David Halperin, Annie Leonard, Cynthia Renfro, press officer for regulatory advocates of democratic principles working on their David Rosen, behalf; from foundations; and from the sale of our publica- Steve Skrovan, Gerson H.
Recommended publications
  • A Player's Guide Part 1

    A Player's Guide Part 1

    A Player’s Guide Effective: 9/20/2010 Items labeled with a are available exclusively through Print-and-Play Any page references refer to the HeroClix 2010 Core Rulebook Part 1 – Clarifications Section 1: Rulebook 3 Section 2: Powers and Abilities 5 Section 3: Abilities 9 Section 4: Characters and Special Powers 11 Section 5: Special Characters 19 Section 6: Team Abilities 21 Section 7: Alternate Team Abilities 23 Section 8: Objects 25 Section 9: Maps 27 Part 2 – Current Wordings Section 10: Powers 29 Section 11: Abilities 33 Section 12: Characters and Special Powers 35 Section 13: Team Abilities 71 Section 14: Alternate Team Abilities 75 Section 15: Objects 77 Section 16: Maps 79 How To Use This Document This document is divided into two parts. The first part details every clarification that has been made in Heroclix for all game elements. These 40 pages are the minimal requirements for being up to date on all Heroclix rulings. Part two is a reference guide for players and judges who often need to know the latest text of any given game element. Any modification listed in part two is also listed in part one; however, in part two the modifications will be shown as fully completed elements of game text. [This page is intentionally left blank] Section 1 Rulebook at the time that the player gives the character an action or General otherwise uses the feat.‖ Characters that are removed from the battle map and placed Many figures have been published with rules detailing their on feat cards are not affected by Battlefield Conditions.
  • Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Synthetic Fuels: Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports

    Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Synthetic Fuels: Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports

    Increased Automobile Fuel Efficiency and Synthetic Fuels: Alternatives for Reducing Oil Imports September 1982 NTIS order #PB83-126094 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 82-600603 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Foreword This report presents the findings of an assessment requested by the Senate Com- mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The study assesses and compares increased automobile fuel efficiency and synthetic fuels production with respect to their potential to reduce conventional oil consumption, and their costs and impacts. Con- servation and fuel switching as a means of reducing stationary oil uses are also con- sidered, but in considerably less detail, in order to enable estimates of plausible future oil imports. We are grateful for the assistance of the project advisory panels and the many other people who provided advice, information, and reviews. It should be understood, how- ever, that OTA assumes full responsibility for this report, which does not necessarily represent the views of individual members of the advisory panels. Director Automobile Fuel Efficiency Advisory Panel Michael J. Rabins, Chairman Wayne State University Maudine R. Cooper* John B. Heywood National Urban League, Inc. Massachusetts Institute of Technology John Ferron John Holden National Automobile Dealers Association Ford Motor Co. Donald Friedman Maryann N. Keller Minicar, Inc. Paine, Webber, Mitchell, & Hutchins Herbert Fuhrman Paul Larsen National Institute for GMC Truck and Coach Division Automobile Service Excellence Robert D. Nell James M. Gill Consumers Union The Ethyl Corp. Kenneth Orski R. Eugene Goodson** German Marshall Fund of the United States Hoover Universal, Inc.
  • Public Citizen Copyright © 2016 by Public Citizen Foundation All Rights Reserved

    Public Citizen Copyright © 2016 by Public Citizen Foundation All Rights Reserved

    Public Citizen Copyright © 2016 by Public Citizen Foundation All rights reserved. Public Citizen Foundation 1600 20th St. NW Washington, D.C. 20009 www.citizen.org ISBN: 978-1-58231-099-2 Doyle Printing, 2016 Printed in the United States of America PUBLIC CITIZEN THE SENTINEL OF DEMOCRACY CONTENTS Preface: The Biggest Get ...................................................................7 Introduction ....................................................................................11 1 Nader’s Raiders for the Lost Democracy....................................... 15 2 Tools for Attack on All Fronts.......................................................29 3 Creating a Healthy Democracy .....................................................43 4 Seeking Justice, Setting Precedents ..............................................61 5 The Race for Auto Safety ..............................................................89 6 Money and Politics: Making Government Accountable ..............113 7 Citizen Safeguards Under Siege: Regulatory Backlash ................155 8 The Phony “Lawsuit Crisis” .........................................................173 9 Saving Your Energy .................................................................... 197 10 Going Global ...............................................................................231 11 The Fifth Branch of Government................................................ 261 Appendix ......................................................................................271 Acknowledgments ........................................................................289
  • Plaintiffs, ) ) V

    Plaintiffs, ) ) V

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CENTER FOR AUTO SAFETY, et al., ) ) Case No. 04-0392 (ESH) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ) SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS This case challenges a de facto legislative rule, promulgated in a 1998 letter to auto manufacturers from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”), that permits vehicle manufacturers to conduct “regional recalls.” Regional recalls exclude vehicle owners residing in large parts of the country from the warning and free remedy that is guaranteed by the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (“Safety Act”) to all owners of motor vehicles containing safety-related defects. In its motion to dismiss, NHTSA suggests that plaintiffs Public Citizen and the Center for Auto Safety want to substitute their judgment for that of the agency. To the contrary, through this lawsuit, plaintiffs hope to force NHTSA to comply with Congress’s judgment that safety recalls should protect all motorists, not just those living in select states. NHTSA’s motion falters from the start by mischaracterizing the complaint. Contrary to NHTSA’s repeated statements, plaintiffs are not challenging individual past or future regional recalls. Rather, plaintiffs challenge NHTSA’s across-the-board rule authorizing and setting the standards for regional recalls. The agency’s 1998 letters to auto manufacturers contain specific directives and requirements controlling the conduct of regional recalls, which both bind manufacturers and limit NHTSA’s discretion to take certain actions. Furthermore, plaintiffs have standing to bring this action, as amply illustrated by the complaint, declarations ignored by NHTSA, and additional declarations submitted with this opposition.
  • But Public Citizen Still Fights for Consumers

    But Public Citizen Still Fights for Consumers

    A lot has changed since 1971 ... n that year ... the Watergate was still just a little-known hotel in Washington ... people drove sta- tion wagons, not SUVs ... passengers could smoke on airplanes ... nuclear Ipower was flourishing ... and a first-class stamp cost 6 cents. Public Citizen has changed, too. From our founding in 1971 by consumer advocate Ralph Nader, we have grown into a potent countervailing force to the might of Corporate America. Today, we are larger and stronger than ever. But what hasn’t changed are the traits that have served us well: independence, per- sistence, vigilance. We’ve been the eyes and ears — and sometimes the teeth — of consumers through the administrations of six presidents and through 15 Congresses. We were born in an era of activism, during a But Public Citizen period when the Con- gress was creating Still Fights for important new agencies — the Environmental Protection Agency, the Occupational Consumers Safety and Health Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration — to mitigate the health and safety risks posed by our industrial society. Since that time, we’ve withstood a withering corporate backlash against consumer protection. But we have been uncompromising in our fight for safer products, for government and corporate accountability, for clean elections, for a strong and vibrant civil justice system, and for clean and safe energy. We have evolved with the times, keeping our core values while moving into new arenas, such as globalization and electricity deregulation now devastating California consumers. Public Citizen has won many battles for consumers.
  • Ralph Nader, Founder 215 Pennsylvania Ave SE

    Ralph Nader, Founder 215 Pennsylvania Ave SE

    Buyers Up · Congress Watch · Critical Mass · Global Trade Watch · Health Research Group · Litigation Group Joan Claybrook, President December 15, 2003 Dr. Margo Schwab Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Office of Management and Budget NEOB Room 10201 725 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503 [email protected] Re: Proposed Bulletin on Peer Review and Information Quality 68 FR 54023 Dear Dr. Schwab: Public Citizen is a national non-profit consumer advocacy organization with over 150,000 members. We are writing in response to the September 15, 2003 notice in the Federal Register requesting comments on the Proposed Bulletin on Peer Review and Information Quality [“Proposed Bulletin”] issued by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget [“OMB/OIRA”]. These comments should be read in conjunction with the remarks made at the National Academy of Sciences Workshop1 [“NAS Workshop”] on November 18, 2003, by Public Citizen Attorney Alan B. Morrison. Because the new procedures would create constraints on regulatory functioning that are unnecessary, improvident and costly, we urge that the Proposed Bulletin be withdrawn. The essential issue presented by this proposal is not whether peer review should be expanded or improved; it is whether this particular proposal bears the hallmarks of a sincere interest in science or is instead an exercise in regulatory obstructionism. As our detailed comments below demonstrate, in this proposal OMB/OIRA has consistently taken the path that will predictably favor regulated industry and introduce potentially massive costs and delay, thus injecting paralysis by analysis into the regulatory process. 1 “Peer Review Standards for Regulatory Science and Technical Information,” Science, Technology, and Law Program, The National Academies, November 18, 2003.
  • Senator SIMON. Mr. Chairman, If I Could Just Say I Am Going to the Same Press Conference on Health Care

    Senator SIMON. Mr. Chairman, If I Could Just Say I Am Going to the Same Press Conference on Health Care

    468 Senator SIMON. Mr. Chairman, if I could just say I am going to the same press conference on health care. The CHAIRMAN. One thing Mr. Nader understands is press con- ferences, and I am sure he will understand your need to be there. Senator METZENBAUM. Also, he understands health care. The CHAIRMAN. He understands health care, as well. As a matter of fact, I am surprised he is not going to the press conference with you. Senator COHEN. Mr. Chairman, I am told there is going to be a vote at 1:45 p.m. The CHAIRMAN. I am glad to be informed of all these things. Why don't we just begin and we will see where the schedule takes us. Mr. Nader, welcome. PANEL CONSISTING OF RALPH NADER, WASHINGTON, DC; SID- NEY M. WOLFE, CITIZEN'S GROUP, WASHINGTON, DC; LLOYD CONSTANTINE, CONSTANTINE & ASSOCIATES, NEW YORK, NY; AND RALPH ZESTES, KOGOD COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AD- MINISTRATION, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, WASHINGTON, DC STATEMENT OF RALPH NADER Mr. NADER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the com- mittee. I would like to submit my 20-page testimony and note that there are five important attachments: First, one by Professor Carstensen, of the University of Wisconsin Law School, dealing with the case of price squeeze that was so widely discussed earlier in these hear- ings, a case by Judge Breyer; second, a thorough critique by a friend of Judge Breyer, but he is a critic, Professor Tom McGarity, of the University of Texas Law School, on Judge Breyer's health and environmental safety positions; third, a critique of Judge Breyer's chapter on the National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis- tration, by Clarence Ditlow and Joan Claybrook, which illustrates that some of Judge Breyer's research is quite shoddy; fourth, a list of very stimulating questions by Prof.
  • Federal Regulatory Management of the Automobile in the United States, 1966–1988

    Federal Regulatory Management of the Automobile in the United States, 1966–1988

    FEDERAL REGULATORY MANAGEMENT OF THE AUTOMOBILE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1966–1988 by LEE JARED VINSEL DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences of Carnegie Mellon University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Carnegie Mellon University May 2011 Dissertation Committee: Professor David A. Hounshell, Chair Professor Jay Aronson Professor John Soluri Professor Joel A. Tarr Professor Steven Usselman (Georgia Tech) © 2011 Lee Jared Vinsel ii Dedication For the Vinsels, the McFaddens, and the Middletons and for Abigail, who held the ship steady iii Abstract Federal Regulatory Management of the Automobile in the United States, 1966–1988 by LEE JARED VINSEL Dissertation Director: Professor David A. Hounshell Throughout the 20th century, the automobile became the great American machine, a technological object that became inseparable from every level of American life and culture from the cycles of the national economy to the passions of teen dating, from the travails of labor struggles to the travels of “soccer moms.” Yet, the automobile brought with it multiple dimensions of risk: crashes mangled bodies, tailpipes spewed toxic exhausts, and engines “guzzled” increasingly limited fuel resources. During the 1960s and 1970s, the United States Federal government created institutions—primarily the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration within the Department of Transportation and the Office of Mobile Source Pollution Control in the Environmental Protection Agency—to regulate the automobile industry around three concerns, namely crash safety, fuel efficiency, and control of emissions. This dissertation examines the growth of state institutions to regulate these three concerns during the 1960s and 1970s through the 1980s when iv the state came under fire from new political forces and governmental bureaucracies experienced large cutbacks in budgets and staff.
  • Public Citizen, Inc. and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace V

    Public Citizen, Inc. and San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace V

    NO. 07-71868 and NO. 07-72555 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PUBLIC CITIZEN, INC. and SAN LUIS OBISPO MOTHERS FOR PEACE, Petitioners, V. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. "and NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE, Intervenor-Respondeit, THE STATE OF NEW YORK Petitioner, V. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondents. BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE EDMUND G. BROWN JR.,, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER STATE .OFNEW•ORK EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Attorney. General of the State of California JANET GAARD, Acting Chief Assistant Attorney General . THEODORA BERGER, SeniorAssistant Attorney -General SUSAN DURBIN, BRIAN HEM[BACHER, Deputy Attorneys General 300 SpringStreet,.gSuth Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Telephone: (213) 897-2638 Facsimile: (213) 897-2802 Attorneys for Amici Curiae TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ............................ ....................... 1 INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE ....................................... 6 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ........................................ 7 A RG UM EN T ............................... ...................... 10 I. THE NRC'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION VIOLATES THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT BECAUSE THE REASONS IT GIVES FOR DENYING THE PETITION ARE NOT RATIONAL, BUT ARE ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS AND NOT DIRECTED TO THE PETITION'S REQUEST .......................... ......... 10 A. The Design Basis Threat Rule Is Not Rational in That it Does Not Address NRC's Statutory Responsibilities .................... 10 B. The NRC Has Violated the Administrative Procedure Act by Failing to Directly Address the Relief Requested in the Petition ......... 15 II. THE NRC HAS ACTED ARBITRARILY AND CAPRICIOUSLY IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE DIRECTION OF CONGRESS IN THE ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005.
  • Private Fuel Storage: a Public Hazard

    Private Fuel Storage: a Public Hazard

    Buyers Up · Congress Watch · Critical Mass · Global Trade Watch · Health Research Group · Litigation Group Joan Claybrook, President Private Fuel Storage: A Public Hazard Private Fuel Storage (PFS) is a consortium of eight commercial nuclear utility companies that have come together with the goal of opening a “temporary” high-level nuclear waste storage facility on the reservation of the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians in Skull Valley, Utah, about 45 miles west of Salt Lake City. PFS is led by Xcel Energy; the other seven utilities are: · Southern Nuclear Company · Indiana-Michigan Power Co. (American · Genoa FuelTech Electric Power) · Southern California Edison · Florida Power and Light · Entergy · FirstEnergy Many of the nation’s 103 commercial nuclear reactors are running out of space on site to store “spent” nuclear fuel, which is extremely radioactive, and are looking for storage space to tide them over until the expected opening of the controversial Yucca Mountain repository in Nevada sometime after 2010. The proposed Private Fuel Storage facility would house up to 4,000 above-ground dry storage casks, containing a total of 44,000 tons of highly-radioactive nuclear waste. Problems with PFS: v The proposed site is located directly underneath the U.S. Air Force flight path from Hill Air Force Base to the Utah Test and Training Range. On March 10, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Atomic Safety Licensing Board ruled that “PFS has not provided reasonable assurance that F-16 aircraft crash accidents do not pose a significant threat to the facility.”1 An F-16 is a single-engine aircraft with little recourse in the case of engine problems.
  • NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor-State Cases 1994-2005

    NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor-State Cases 1994-2005

    NAFTA’S THREAT TO SOVEREIGNTY AND DEMOCRACY: The Record of NAFTA Chapter 11 Investor-State Cases 1994-2005 Lessons for the Central America Free Trade Agreement February 2005 © 2005 by Public Citizens Global Trade Watch. All rights reserved. No part of this document may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photography, recording, or by information exchange and retrieval systems, without written permission from the authors. Public Citizen Publication Number: E9014 Public Citizen is a nonprofit membership organization in Washington, D.C., dedicated to advancing consumer rights through lobbying, litigation, research, publications and information services. Since its founding by Ralph Nader in 1971, Public Citizen has fought for consumer rights in the marketplace, for safe and secure health care, for fair trade, for clean and safe energy sources, and for corporate and government accountability. Visit our web page at http://www.citizen.org. Acknowledgments: This report was written by Mary Bottari and Lori Wallach. Additional writing and invaluable research assistance was provided by Runako Kumbula, David Waskow (Friends of the Earth), Josh Kolsky, Joshua Chanin, and Heather Goss. Other assistance was provided by Juan Marchini, Carlos La Hoz, Todd Tucker, Libby Sinback, Paul Levy, Alyssa Prorok, Susan Ellsworth, John Gibler, David Edeli, Angela Bradbery, Timi Gerson, Peter Lurie, Patricial Lovera, Tony Corbo and Sara Johnson. Special thanks to Chris Slevin at Public Citizen, Matthew Porterfield and Robert Stumberg at Georgetown University, Marcos Orellana at Center for International Environmental Law, Luke Peterson from the International Institute of Sustainable Development, and Martin Wagner at Earthjustice.
  • Open Government: Lessons from America

    Open Government: Lessons from America

    OPEN GOVERNMENT Lessons from America STEWART DRESNER May 1980 £3.00 OPEN GOVERNMENT: LESSONS FROM AMERICA CONTENTS Page Foreword Preface I Introduction 1 II The Open Government Concept and the British Government response 3 III Hew Open Government Legislation works in the United States 8 (1) Hie Freedom of Information Act 8 (2) The Privacy Act 25 (3) The Government in the Sunshine Act 31 IV What needs to be kept secret? 42 V Who uses the American Open Government Laws? 60 (1) Public Interest Groups 61 (2) The Media 69 (3) Individuals and Scholars 74 (4) Companies 76 (5) Civil Servants 80 VI Balancing Public Access to Government Information with the Protection of Individual Privacy 88 (1) The Issues 88 (2) The Protection of Personal Information by the U.S. Privacy Act 1974 91 (3) The Personal Privacy Exenption to the 101A 96 (4) The Relationship between the IOIA and the PA 98 (5) Public Access and Privacy Protection in an Administrative Programme 99 ii Page VII Ensuring Government Compliance with Public Access legislation 105 (1) Actaiinistrative Procedures 105 (2) Appeal Procedures 107 (3) Monitoring the Effectiveness of Public Access Legislation 117 VIII Ihe Costs and Benefits of Open Government 126 (1) National Security 127 (2) Constitutional Relationships 127 (3) Administrative and other Costs 132 IX Conclusion: Information, Democracy and Power 141 Bibliography i-xi FOREWORD Last year the related subjects of official secrets and freedom of information had a thorough but abortive airing. Mr. Clement Freud's Official Information Bill after a long and interesting committee stage became a victim of the general election.