Midnight regulations and the Cinderella effect

Recent studies have shown preliminary evidence of a tendency for outgoing administrations to generate a flurry of last-minute regulatory activity. This so-called Cinderella effect is described as resulting from the combination of an administration being in power yet, because it is out-going, not being subject to political ramifications from its actions. In this paper, we look at monthly regulatory activity over the past 30 years and compare the baseline growth in regulations (measured using the proxy of pages in the Federal Register) to the growth immediately following a Presidential election when the sitting President is re-elected, not re-elected, and when the party in control of the White House changes. We find significant evidence supporting the existence of a Cinderella effect.     

Do workers want OSHA’s ergonomics regulations?

conclusion OSHA’s proposed Ergonomics Rule will clearly impose serious costs on firms across many industries, but industries where MSD risk is highest will face much greater costs. OSHA recognizes this by excluding some high-risk industries. For the higher risk indus-tries that are covered by the proposal, OSHA suggests that benefits to firms and employ-ees will outweigh these costs. We argue that OSHA has ignored the importance of differences in individual preferences for accepting risk and that compensating wage differentials allow different individuals to maximize their utility by making trade-offs between safety and wages.     

Council of Europe regulations relevant to intervening in psychic capacities

The paper highlights the need to clarify the definition of psychic capacities and the difficulty in distinguishing between improved capacity and improved functioning. Before considering whether it is legally permissible to undertake an intervention on psychic capacities, and if so under what conditions, it is necessary to consider whether such an intervention is ethically appropriate. If the intervention is ethically appropriate, whether it is legally permissible according to the instruments of the Council of Europe will depend on the persons status (for example, whether the person is an adult or a child, or able or not able to give consent), the type of intervention proposed, and in certain cases the type of material used in the intervention. The paper discusses the regulations that are relevant to these different situations.

---

Zusammenfassung  Dieser Beitrag unterstreicht die Notwendigkeit, die Definition des Begriffs psychische Fähigkeiten zu klären, und die Schwierigkeit, zwischen verbesserten Fähigkeiten und verbesserter Funktion zu unterscheiden. Bevor wir erörtern, ob ein Eingriff in psychische Fähigkeiten rechtlich zulässig ist und, wenn ja, unter welchen Bedingungen, müssen wir überlegen, ob eine solche Intervention ethisch angemessen ist. Wenn das der Fall ist, hängt die rechtliche Zulässigkeit, entsprechend den Instrumenten des Europäischen Rates, vom Status der betroffenen Person ab (zum Beispiel, ob es sich um einen Erwachsen oder ein Kind handelt), von der Art des Eingriffs, der zur Debatte steht, und in bestimmten Fällen dem Material, das bei diesem Eingriff benutzt wird. Der Beitrag behandelt die Vorschriften, die in diesen unterschiedlichen Situationen zum Tragen kommen.

---

Résumé  Cet article met en lumière le besoin de clarifier la définition des « capacités psychiques » et la difficulté à faire la différence entre capacité améliorée et fonctionnement amélioré. Avant de décider sil est légalement licite dintervenir sur les capacités psychiques, et si oui, dans quelles conditions, il est nécessaire de se demander si une telle intervention est justifiée du point de vue éthique. La question de savoir si une intervention est appropriée du point de vue éthique et si elle est légalement licite en vertu des instruments du Conseil de lEurope, dépend du statut de la personne (si la personne est un adulte ou un enfant, si elle est capable ou non de donner son consentement, etc.), du type dintervention envisagé, et dans certains cas du type de matériel utilisé pour lintervention. Larticle examine les réglementations qui sappliquent à ces différentes situations.

---

---

All opinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the author.

---

自来水产业规制改革中的困惑

一、自来水是"公共品"吗? 纯公共品具有非竞争性和非排他性,但是,自来水的消费既有竞争性,又有非竞争性;既有排他性,又有非排他性:1.竞争性.自来水公司的边际生产成本为正,在用水高峰期,消费者数量的增加会导致水压不足、用水紧张.2.非竞争性.总供应量不变时,生产成本固定,只要用水不超过临界值,消费者用水互不影响.3.排他性.消费者必须购买、安装和维护水管等设施,并按期缴纳水费.未经主人同意,他人不能用水.不缴水费就会被停水.4.非排他性.除非消费者的水管完全独立于公共管道,自来水公司不能停供公共水管的水以惩罚其中一两个不缴水费的消费者.