The Impact of Driver Cell Phone Use on Accidents

Cell phone use is increasing worldwide, leading to a concern that cell phone use while driving increases accidents. We develop a new approach for estimating the relationship between cell phone use while driving and accidents, based on new survey data. We test for selection effects, such as whether drivers who use cell phones are inherently less safe drivers, even when not on the phone. The paper has two key findings. First, the impact of cell phone use on accidents varies across the population. This result implies that previous estimates of the impact of cell phone use on risk for the population, based on accident-only samples, may therefore be overstated by 36%. Second, once we correct for endogeneity, there is no significant effect of hands-free or hand-held cell phone use on accidents.cellular telephones and driving, safety regulation, selection effects

The Myth of Network Neutrality and What We Should Do About It

A quarter century ago, there was a very influential paper that shaped thinking on how best to design what we now call the Internet. The article offered a design principle called "end-to-end." The idea was to keep the inner part of a computer network as simple as possible and allow the "intelligence" to reside at the edges of the network closer to the end user. Proponents of this grand design have pushed for net neutrality legislation, which would discourage access providers from placing any intelligence in the inner part of the network. Their ideal of a "dumb network" would be achieved by preventing access providers from charging content providers for prioritized delivery and other quality enhancements made possible by placing intelligence at the center of the network. This essay examines the merits of the end-to-end argument as it relates to the net neutrality debate. First, we review the evidence on the current status of the Internet, concluding that all bits of information are not treated equally from an economic standpoint. Second, we demonstrate that because consumers and business place a premium on speed and reliability for certain kinds of Internet services, network owners and specialized service providers have responded with customized offerings. Third, we consider our findings in the context of the current legislative proposals involving net neutrality. Fourth, we consider some of the problems with regulating prices and quality of service, which is essentially what the net neutrality proponents propose. Our principle conclusions are that the end-to-end principle does not make sense from an economic perspective and that further regulation of the Internet is not warranted at this point in time.Technology and Industry

An Analysis of the Ninth Government Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's ninth report on the benefits and costs of federal regulation. The draft report is similar to previous reports, and does not break new ground. We offer seven recommendations, six for OMB and one for Congress, that would help hold lawmakers and regulators more accountable for the regulations they produce. Our recommendations focus on getting the regulatory agencies to produce better analysis, making that analysis more transparent and readily available, and making the regulatory process itself more transparent. We recommend that OMB: examine the extent to which regulations maximize net benefits; include a scorecard showing the number and percentage of final regulations that pass a benefit-cost test based on factors that can be quantified and monetized; request that all agencies report on the extent to which they comply with OMB's guidelines for conducting regulatory analysis; provide guidelines for assessing the effectiveness of antiterrorism regulations; include a discussion of the costs and benefits of antitrust activities in its annual report; and facilitate the use of information markets to increase overall economic efficiency and to inform regulatory decision making. We also recommend that Congress require all agencies to comply with OMB's guidelines for conducting regulatory analysis.

The Impact of Driver Cell Phone Use on Accidents

Cell phone use is increasing worldwide, leading to a concern that cell phone use while driving increases accidents. Several countries, three states and Washington, D.C. have banned the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. In this paper, we develop a new approach for estimating the relationship between cell phone use while driving and accidents. Our approach is the first to allow for the direct estimation of the impact of a cell phone ban while driving. It is based on new survey data from over 7,000 individuals. This paper differs from previous research in two significant ways: first, we use a larger sample of individual-level data; and second, we test for selection effects, such as whether drivers who use cell phones are inherently less safe drivers, even when not on the phone. The paper has two key findings. First, the impact of cell phone use on accidents varies across the population. This result implies that previous estimates of the impact of cell phone use on risk for the population, based on accident-only samples, may be overstated by about one-third. Second, once we correct for endogeneity, there is no significant effect of hands-free or hand-held cell phone use on accidents.

An Analysis of the Second Government Draft Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's second report on the costs and benefits of federal regulation. The purpose of this analysis is to offer constructive recommendations for improving that report. Our main conclusion is that the OMB report represents an improvement over the previous year in terms of the quantity of information presented and the nature of the presentation. However, it still has some serious problems that need to be addressed. Perhaps the most serious deficiency is that the OMB fails to take adequate advantage of its in-house expertise in providing a candid assessment of the costs and benefits of regulation.

An Analysis of the Tenth Government Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's tenth report on the benefits and costs of federal regulations. The draft report is similar to previous reports, and does not break new ground. We offer seven recommendations, six for OMB and one for Congress, that would help hold lawmakers and regulators more accountable for the regulations they produce. Our recommendations focus on getting the regulatory agencies to produce better analysis, making that analysis more transparent and readily available, and making the regulatory process itself more transparent. We recommend that OMB: examine the extent to which regulations maximize net benefits; include a scorecard showing the number and percentage of final regulations that pass a benefit-cost test based on factors that can be quantified and monetized; request that all agencies report on the extent to which they comply with OMB's guidelines for conducting regulatory analysis using a regulatory scorecard for individual RIAs; provide guidelines for assessing the effectiveness of antiterrorism regulations; include a discussion of the costs and benefits of antitrust activities in its annual report; and facilitate the use of information markets for public and private purposes by issuing a prompt letter to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and encouraging Congress to lowering regulatory barriers to starting these markets. We also recommend that Congress require all agencies to comply with OMB's guidelines for conducting regulatory analysis.

An Analysis of the Fifth Government Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulation

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's fifth report on the benefits and costs of federal regulation. The draft report is a significant improvement over previous reports in terms of the responsiveness to the congressional mandate, and the information it provides on recent improvements at OMB. We think the changes that OMB has made to increase transparency and efficiency are significant. These include making greater use of the Internet to communicate information, sending letters to agencies encouraging specific regulations with net benefits, and providing information on turnaround time for reviewing rules. There is still room for substantial improvement, however. We offer six recommendations, one for Congress and five for OMB, that we believe would be helpful in holding regulators and lawmakers more accountable for the regulations they produce. Our recommendations focus on getting the regulatory agencies to produce better analysis, making that analysis more transparent and readily available, and making the regulatory process itself more transparent. We recommend that Congress require agencies to comply with OMB's economic guidelines. We also suggest that OMB improve its report by including a scorecard on the extent to which regulatory analyses comply with their guidelines; providing more information on regulations aimed at reducing terrorism; and making greater use of its in-house expertise to improve estimates of benefits and costs for individual regulations.

An Analysis of the Third Government Report on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's third report on the benefits and costs of federal regulation. The purpose of this analysis is to offer constructive recommendations for improving that report. We conclude that that report represents a small improvement over the second report. There is, however, room for even more progress. We suggest that OMB make greater use of its in-house expertise to refine estimates of benefits and costs and that it place greater emphasis on those regulations that do not pass a benefit-cost test based on numbers provided by agencies themselves. Using agency numbers reported by OMB, we calculate that about ten recent regulations would not pass a strict benefit-cost test. The OMB should either suggest eliminating or reforming these regulations or explain why they should be kept in place. We also believe that OMB should assemble a scorecard that would assess and compare the quality of regulations and provide guidance on standardizing the content and summary of regulatory analyses. Such changes in presentation would make it easier for interested parties to understand the impacts of regulations and to determine agency compliance with legislation, executive orders, and OMB guidelines.

An Analysis of the Fourth Government Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's fourth report on the benefits and costs of federal regulation. The purpose of this analysis is to offer constructive recommendations for improving that report. We conclude that that this draft report represents a significant departure from previous reports. It provides very little in the way of new quantitative information. Instead, it solicits input on improving the report and the regulatory process. We have provided such input for the previous reports and believe that it has largely been ignored. We provide such input for this report in hopes that the regulatory process will become more transparent and that regulators and lawmakers will be held more accountable for regulations. This draft report has failed to provide a reasonable analysis of newly proposed regulations. At a minimum , the Office of Management and Budget should provide a cogent analysis of these regulations. We recommend that OMB make greater use of its in-house expertise to refine estimates of benefits and costs. We also argue that OMB should focus on the incremental impact of regulations rather than aggregate impacts. Finally, we believe that Congress should give OMB additional authority to enforce its guidelines on standardizing measures of costs and benefits.

An Analysis of the Sixth Government Report on the Costs and Benefits of Federal Regulations

Also of interest by Hahn and Litan, "A Review of the Office of Management and Budget's Draft Guidelines for Conducting Regulatory Analyses". This paper critically reviews the draft of the Office of Management and Budget's sixth report on the benefits and costs of federal regulation. According to Robert W. Hahn and Robert E. Litan, the draft report represents an improvement over previous reports in some ways. While there has been progress, they say, some useful innovations from last year are not included in this draft. Mr. Hahn and Mr. Litan claim that there is room for significant improvement in this draft report. They offer five recommendations, one for Congress and four for OMB, that would help hold lawmakers more accountable for the regulations they produce. These recommendations focus on getting the regulatory agencies to produce better analysis, making that analysis more transparent and readily available, and making the regulatory process itself more transparent The authors recommend that OMB include a scorecard that summarizes the extent to which regulatory analyses comply with OMB's guidelines for regulatory analysis; provide information on regulations addressing terrorist threats; summarize useful information on a number of OMB's regulatory oversight activities, including return letters, prompt letters, turnaround time, and regulations and programs recommended for improvement or reform; and ask independent agencies to provide annual assessments of the costs and benefits of their economically significant regulations. Mr. Hahn and Mr. Litan also suggest that Congress require agencies to comply with OMB's information quality guidelines and guidelines for regulatory analysis.