Replies

Once in every thousand laws or so Congress creates an earthquake that can shift the balance between the federal government and American citizens.

Such is the “Data Quality Act” (DQA), signed into law in the waning days of the Clinton administration.

DQA gives citizens a bulldozer that can rip up huge chunks of bureaucratic debris and bury it. It is written to provide relief to the $900 billion Americans spend annually obeying bureaucratic dictates.

The DQA outlines a legal process where businesses and citizens can petition federal agencies to correct or remove information which does not meet specific standards. This is the underlying data bureaucrats use to write rules and make themselves everyday pests.

The language in the DQA allows citizens to search out and destroy bureaucratic gobbledygook, junk science and politically motivated statements before they are written into rules that spoil the American landscape.

Each federal agency has issued quidelines to challenge information.

DQA also has implications for state bureaucrats, say legal scholars. Many states develop programs based on the federal government’s draft rules and guidelines. If a federal draft is successfully challenged, state agencies will need to drop or rewrite rules.

Additionally, DQA eliminates lawyers and courts as the first step in correcting bureaucratic abuse.

In short, here is the DQA:

In Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 (PL 106-544, H.R. 5658), DQA directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue government-wide guidelines that “provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies.”

The OMB directed that all federal agencies issue guidelines for “administrative mechanisms allowing affected persons to seek and obtain correction of information maintained and disseminated by the agency that does not comply with the OMB guidelines.”

So what does this mean in the big, wide picture of government control vs individual sovereignty?

Food fight!!!!

DQA will pit businesses and individuals against federal bureaucrats who want to control every inch of American life. The rule is set up to challenge information before this data is written into a rule.

Proponents of DQA say it hands people a magnifying glass, eraser, scissors, hammer and chain saw to snip away or obliterate useless nanny government dictates.

Big Brother bureaucrats, on the other hand, and their yipping poodles in Non-Government Organizations like the Sierra Club, oppose the DQA, insisting that challenges will have no affect on their odious rule-making ability. This, of course, is nonsense, unless the bravado is an indication that bureaucrats intend to defy Congress.

The first DQA challenges to bureaucratic infestation are just starting to roll in, and most have been filed by businesses that have the staff and money to object to the science or objectivity in government information.

Under the Section 515 guidelines, “affected persons” can legally challenge any information disseminated by a federal agency at any stage of development, including draft form.

Challenges must clearly demonstrate that specific information does not meet OMB quality standards. OMB, many business, industry groups and legal experts interpret Section 515 to apply to rulemaking, although a few legal analysts disagree.

Agencies must respond to requests to correct information according to timeframes established by their own guidelines and must provide a process for re-appeal. Most legal analysts say that judicial review of final decisions is available, although some disagree.