Regulations designed to protect consumers, workers, and the environment do not have a negative impact on the job market and, in some cases, actually spur job creation, according to new research from the Economic Policy Institute (EPI). The EPI paper, Regulation, Employment, and the Economy: Fears of job loss are overblown, shows that recent criticism surrounding regulations' impact on jobs is misguided and not reflective of economic data.
When the 112th Congress convened, it agreed to a 
Three recently published studies discuss the relationship between regulations and economic development. One study focuses on the job-creation potential of an individual environmental rule, and another touts the economic benefits of clean energy investments. The third study debunks a widely quoted but inaccurate report on the economic costs of regulations. All three reinforce an argument that public interest advocates have made for decades: government standards and public investments in clean energy protect health and safety and encourage job creation.
On May 26, a wide range of federal agencies released 30 preliminary plans outlining steps each intends to take to meet requirements for reviewing existing regulations, reducing burdens on business, and expanding public participation in the rulemaking process. The plans are part of the Obama administration's efforts to examine ways to reduce regulatory costs and identify outdated and ineffective rules.
The House-passed fiscal year 2011 spending bill would stop the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from limiting greenhouse gases from certain sources, halt standards for air and water pollution, and set other conditions on the agency that will complicate its efforts to protect the environment and public health. Other health and safety agencies are also targeted in the bill.