Abstract
An examination of federal consumer safety and health spending on regulatory activity
suggests that the little-known Data Quality Act, passed by Congress in 2000, may have had a
noticeable impact on the creation and implementation of federal regulations.
This act, which makes it far easier to question scientific evidence used to justify
regulations, has altered the regulatory process in several key ways. First, it has created new but
vague standards for the acceptability of scientific research used as the basis for federal
regulations. Each federal agency is now required to establish its own standards that could be used
for evaluating the quality of the data it used to justify a new regulation. Second, it allows any
party to challenge the credibility of the scientific evidence used to justify a regulation. Third, it
has shifted authority for rule-making away from federal agencies and to the federal courts. And
finally, it has made the entire regulatory process more cumbersome and subject to lengthy delays.
The DQA allows industry-sponsored studies to be used to counter the findings of peer-
reviewed scientific research. Additionally, it gives the federal courts final authority to determine
if scientific evidence is credible and sufficient enough to warrant new federal rules, a power
previously held exclusively by government agencies.
Supporters claim that the DQA insures that government action is based on solid and
reliable science. Critics, however, charge that this act exploits the fundamental uncertainty found
in all scientific research and is a callous attempt to prevent the creation of needed health and
environmental protections.
At a minimum, this act will produce additional costs associated with challenges to
regulations; it will lengthen the time necessary for the establishment of regulations by adding
several new potential obstacles; and if used to its fullest extent, it can be a powerful tool to
hinder the development of a broad range of government regulations.
Since the Data Quality Act (DQA) took effect there have been 39 (32 by regulated
industries) challenges to federal regulations. Lawsuits under the DQA have been filed by
industry groups against the National Institutes of Health, the U.S. EPA, and several other federal
agencies. Many of these cases have required some modification to issued regulations.
Since the establishment and implementation of the required agency standards increases in
regulatory spending outlays appear to have dropped. This may suggest that the act has had a
negative impact on regulatory activity, but it is too early to suggest a causal connection.
Convention