STS 214 Quiz 4

Congress has almost always rejected a cost-benefit analysis test

Congress often imposes a cost-benefit test

Congress has never imposed a cost-benefit test

Congress has imposed a cost-benefit test, about half the time

A purely economic approach to risk regulation should be mandatory

A purely economic approach to risk regulation is simply impossible

A purely economic approach to risk regulation would capture widely held social goals

A purely economic approach to risk regulation would threaten widely held social goals

Balances the interests of risk creators and risk bearers, but not in the manner indicated by economic theory

Balances the interests of risk creators and risk bearers precisely as required by economic theory

Balances the interests of risk creators and risk bearers while simply ignoring costs

None of the above

They regard market transactions as being based on voluntary choices

They do not care whether market transactions are voluntary or not

They believe that market transactions can never be voluntary

They believe the level of protection should be based on wealth

Bounded rationality

Public irrationality

Political rationality

Economic rationality

Never allow costs to exceed should

Reflect important relevant social norms and be formulated in light of bounded rationality

Never take costs into account when dealing with human health risks

Pay careful attention to political realitites

High powered political interference

Resistance to government rules on the part of ordinary people

That they are often subject to substantial uncertainty because of bounded rationality

That costs are imposed immediately while benefits appear only later

These studies provide a dubious basis upon which to criticize the rationality of existing risk regulations

These studies establish beyond doubt the high costs of existing regulations

These studies are too ambiguous to allow any conclusions to be drawn

None of the above

Risk regulations have a purely political purpose

Risk regulations have had no actual impact on the economy

Risk regulation appears to have generated aggregate benefits in excess of aggregate costs

Risk regulations are actively supported by the industries subject to them

Make a large positive contribution to economic welfare in the aggregate

Have no substantial impact, positive or negative

Imposed very hard to economic welfare in the aggregate

Make a small, but noticeable, contribution to economic welfare in the aggregate

Reject entirely the notion of agency discretion

Trusts agency experts, thus eliminating the need for oversight

Endorses deference to the exercise of agency discretion

Fails to address the issue of agency discretion

The overseeing entity overrides agency technical judgments

The overseeing entity overrides agency political judgments

The overseeing entity overrides agency economic benefits

The overseeing entity overrides agency bureaucratic procedures

Will dramatically improve regulatory agency performance

Is perfectly compatible with a pragmatic approach to regulation

Can serve to mask the reviewing entity's own substantive biases

Is simply irrelevant in the real world

Helps to overcome sloppy regulatory agency analysis

Represents legislative oversight at its worst

Allows for greater popular input into regulatory decision-making

Enhances the speed with which regulatory agencies issue their rules

Is likely to produce regulatory abuses

Is more consistent with a pragmatic approach to the implementation of risk regulation

Is not consistent with a pragmatic approach to the implementation of risk regulation

Is unworkable