{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01951951951951952, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0022522522522522522, 'mean_word_length': 5.317535545023697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-Benefit and Other Analysis Requirements in the Rulemaking Process

A common concern voiced by proponents of regulatory reform in recent decades has been that the costs associated with certain regulations outweigh the benefits that the regulations are intended to provide. Another, and somewhat related, view is that more intelligent regulatory policies could achieve the same social goals (e.g., cleaner environment, safer workplaces) at less cost, or could achieve more ambitious goals at the same cost. Although many federal agencies are currently required to prepare cost-benefit analyses and cost-effectiveness analyses for certain rules before they are published in the Federal Register, proposed legislation has been introduced in the 113th Congress to expand those requirements to more agencies and more types of rules, and to produce more detailed analyses. This report identifies a number of those bills, but first describes the existing requirements for cost-benefit and other types of analysis in the federal rulemaking process. It also discusses options for changing the current set of analytical requirements. The report does not, however, attempt to address issues related to the quality of the analyses that agencies develop, or whether agencies use the results of cost-benefit analyses to guide decision making.