Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Cass Robert Sunstein was born September 21, 1954 and has a background as an American legal scholar in law, specifically: administrative, environmental, and constitutional law. He also has experience in behavioral economics. Along with time as an American legal scholar, he also held a position at the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as an Administrator. For nearly three decades, Sunstein also instructed at the University of Chicago Law School. His current job is professor at the Robert Walmsley University and Harvard Law School. Such experience and expertise provides Sunstein with enough expert ability to write such a well thought out book as Simpler: The Future of Government. The book itself is loaded with interesting and insightful information not only on law, but on the inner workings of President Barack Obama's administration. As previously mentioned, Sunstein worked as the Adminstrator of OIRA. He managed and supervised the regulatory production of the numerous organizations within the executive branch. Sunstein also regulated, as he mentioned in the book, environmental protection, health care, food safety, worker health, consumer protection, and other activities within the Office of Management and Budget, to make sure the country and the agencies within it ran...
As he mentioned some of the things that are still within his inbox, he includes a group of Department of Energy efficiency standards that have remained unchecked since 2011. The standards are meant to minimize exposure to a main cause of sick workers annually, silica dust. He ultimately chose to ignore such important things and that is one noteworthy part of the book, is his explanation of his authority within the White House.
Sunstein had the power, ultimately, to stop, even slow down activities within the president's Cabinet. "Nonetheless, OIRA's authority to slow down or even to halt regulations-to say no to members of the president's Cabinet-gives the administrator a major role in shaping their content" (Sunstein, 2013, p. 3). This somewhat "eagerly" mentioned aspect of his book is a great way to objectively see how people worked and behaved in important areas of government. It was a means of looking into how "rules" were essentially accepted or dismissed. OIRA's cost-benefit test, essentially made it so agencies could not move forward with their rules, should they fail such a test.
Sunstein provides a good…
Sunstein provides a good example of this kind of decision making process towards the end of the book by explaining that although some things may cost more than benefit in a monetary sense, they can benefit more in other ways. "Suppose that a workplace safety rule would cost $400 million and produce benefits of $350 million. At first glance the rule fails a cost-benefit test. But suppose that the costs would be incurred by those who sell and use a luxury good" (Sunstein, 2013, p. 160). He goes on to use pollution and explains in terms of human welfare, the importance of certain actions that may seem more costly than beneficial, financially, but socially, health wise, may be worth it. Ultimately what OIRA's main goal is, is to prevent accidents, disease, and save lives. All of these are important to consider and may represent hurdles when trying to figure out and budget government expenses through agency actions.
Sunstein does a great job of explaining how these hurdles are often dealt with and what it takes to get to a point of agreement and conclusion. People often fail to understand what goes on behind the curtain and assume that the government is full of corrupt individuals that ignore the facts and instead go by the way of lobbyists and people who fund political campaigns. However, Sunstein shows that although facts are not completely ignored, it's not just the facts that are being taken under consideration, but also the impact on one's individual value system. "When people disagree about a rule that would protect clean air or increase highway safety, it is because of what they most value, not because of disagreements about the evidence. Facts are not irrelevant, but they are hardly the main event" (Sunstein, 2013, p. 147).
Sunstein has always had a clear voice when it came to politics and regulation. In a recent article, he explains his ideas under the context of Hayek, as well as his thoughts on regulation of government. "Instead of conservatism, Hayek argued for a principled commitment to liberty -- an approach that would sharply constrain government and "take an essentially radical position, directed against popular prejudices, entrenched positions and firmly established privileges" (Washington Post, 2014). So often one cannot see the voice behind a writer as clear as is seen in this book and in Sunstein. He has the ability to concisely and clearly show his own perspective as well as the overall perspective of the government as it relates to people, agencies, processes, law, and oversight.
Consumer Protection Agency is tasked with ensuring that products which are deemed unsafe are removed from the market either permanently or until they meet federal safety standards. The agency provides a list of these products for the public, and they are generally announce in some fashion also. The agency maintains a website via which it keeps a list of the products that have been recalled and for what reason. The
Consumer Protection Which do you believe presents the greatest threat to civil society: a corporation that commits crimes (e.g., murder, environmental crimes, or bribery, etc.), or persons who commit crimes that harm businesses (e.g., embezzlement, fraud, or larceny, etc.)? Defend your response, using at least one example from current events. The greatest threat to civil society is corporations that commit crimes. This is due in part the overall prevalence of the business
Consumer Protection Memo: Consumer Protection In their article in the Harvard Business Review, Robinson, Viscusi & Zeckhauser (2016) argue that consumer warning labels are not effective. They resoundingly assert that the labels do not communicate adequate information for consumers, especially in terms of benefits and risks. Essentially, the current labeling system is miserably ineffective in differentiating between significant and insignificant risks, or between "wolves" and "puppies" as the authors put it. Most
He defined the ideals that people share about how people ought to behave a "categorical imperative" - a transcendent concept of "rightness of action." No one would want to be taken advantage of the way Countrywide did, and under no circumstances did they themselves believe their actions were "right." Egoism or self-interest ethics may explain the Countrywide rationale, after all, they were acting to advance own interests, over all else.
Potential Concerns about the Consumer Financial Protection Agency Despite the multitude of benefits revealed by the CFPA, commercial banks and mortgage lenders continually present their growing dissatisfaction with the act. Representatives of this side include reputable organizations such as JP Morgan Chase or Wells Fargo, as well as a series of independent mortgage brokers and mortgage lenders and local and regional banking institutions. Their most compelling reasons for the dismissal
This is achieved by forcing them to maintain a list of individuals who do not wish to be conducted about purchasing a variety of products and services. Furthermore, these protections were enacted to ensure that businesses are not engaging in tactics that are abusive by limiting the times when they can call and what they can say. (Caudill, 2000) In contrast with the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, the proposed