Podcasts about Rulemaking

How do regulators actually write the rules for crypto? SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce and Taylor Lindman, Chief Counsel of the SEC's Crypto Task Force, take us inside the process, recorded at the SEC offices in Washington, D.C.We cover CLARITY Act rulemaking, lessons from Dodd-Frank, principles-based regulation and navigating the risks of decentralized projects. If you want to understand how an agency like the SEC actually works, this episode is for you.Timestamps:0:00 Intro1:20 Commissioner Peirce's philosophy on capital markets5:04 Rulemaking at the SEC6:48 The SEC's divisions, explained8:27 How the Crypto Task Force is staffed10:37 Lessons from Dodd-Frank13:10 Legal artisans15:15 The Clarity Act deadlines18:55 Decentralized intermediaries20:56 Principles-based vs prescriptive regulation24:49 Tackling difficult crypto questions26:23 Leveraging AI for data review29:46 "Come in and register" under this SEC33:50 SEC & CFTC collaboration35:52 Re-engaging the crypto industry40:00 Crypto Task Force & the Clarity Act45:54 The SEC's non-crypto priorities48:41 Avoiding another regulation-by-enforcement era57:14 Thank you to Sam Enzer, Lewis Cohen and Cahill, plus a shoutout to Day One Law and Nick PullmanNewsletter: I'm re-launching the Law of Code newsletter soon: you can ⁠⁠⁠stay updated on emerging tech law for free here⁠⁠⁠: https://www.lawofcode.fm/Any feedback on this episode? Or how to improve the podcast? ⁠⁠Click here: https://forms.gle/W4d2a5aHuLJjuNdn7Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

This week, we're looking at what makes up the bulk of the ATF's new gun rule package: industry regulations. To discuss how the rulemaking will impact gun makers, importers, and retailers, we have Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) on the show. NSSF is the gun industry's trade group, which represents most of the major gun brands in America. Keane said the ATF's proposed changes are the most significant he's seen, and he outlined some of the rules he believes will have the greatest impact. He said that while the ATF consulted NSSF on some of the rules, the group was still reviewing the full text of the dozens of proposals. He argued it will help streamline recordkeeping and sales processing for the gun industry, as well as minimize potential paperwork violations. Keane said the change to the definition of what constitutes a willful violation will help prevent the sort of zero-tolerance policy the Biden Administration imposed. Keane also said the rollback of the pistol brace rule is promising but leaves some questions open. He said the industry doesn't think the gender ID change will prevent anyone from buying guns, but wants further clarity. Still, he said NSSF is very happy with the overall package.Special Guest: Larry Keane.

In this episode of the Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast, host Alan Kaplinsky (founder, former chair for 25 years and now Senior Counsel) had the pleasure of speaking with Sam Levine, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP), about the agency's evolving role as one of the most active local consumer protection regulators in the country. Important note: This podcast was recorded prior to DCWP's April 8, 2026 release of its proposed "click-to-cancel" rule addressing subscription practices. Alan recorded a description of the proposed rule which is at the end of the recording. We also wrote a separate blog about that significant development. A Local Regulator with National Influence From the outset, Commissioner Levine emphasized that DCWP is not simply a municipal agency focused on traditional licensing and enforcement, but rather a modern regulator tackling complex consumer protection issues that increasingly mirror those addressed at the federal level. "Local enforcement can be incredibly impactful—we're often closest to consumers and can move quickly to address emerging harms." He noted that New York City's scale and diversity make it a uniquely important testing ground for innovative consumer protection strategies. Executive Orders Driving Enforcement Priorities A key backdrop to DCWP's current activity is a pair of mayoral directives—Executive Order 9 and Executive Order 10—issued by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani on January 5, 2026 (shortly after he took office) which we have discussed in a prior blog post. These Executive Orders signal a clear policy direction to fulfill his campaign promise to make life more affordable for everyday New Yorkers: an intensified focus on consumer protection, particularly in areas involving deceptive practices, hidden or "junk" fees, and recurring payment models. Executive Order 10, in particular, directs DCWP to prioritize enforcement against "subscription traps" and misleading recurring charge practices—laying the groundwork for the Department's subsequent proposed "click-to-cancel" rule published on April 8, 2026. Commissioner Levine made clear that these directives are not merely aspirational, but are actively shaping the agency's enforcement and rulemaking agenda: "We're aligning our work with the Mayor's directive to go after practices that frustrate consumers and undermine fair competition." Enforcement Priorities: Targeting Deceptive Practices A central theme of our discussion was DCWP's aggressive focus on deceptive and unconscionable trade practices, particularly in areas where consumers are most vulnerable. Commissioner Levine highlighted the agency's work in combatting: 1.     Hidden fees and misleading pricing practices 2.     Predatory lending and financial services abuses 3.     Worker exploitation in the gig economy 4.     Emerging digital marketplace risks "We're focused on conduct that distorts consumer choice—where people think they're getting one thing but end up locked into something very different." He underscored that transparency and fairness are guiding principles behind DCWP's enforcement agenda. Final Debt Collection Rules: A Significant Regulatory Development We also discussed DCWP's recently finalized debt collection regulations, which we have analyzed in prior blog coverage. These rules represent one of the most significant updates to New York City's debt collection framework in years. Commissioner Levine emphasized that the rules are designed to modernize existing requirements and address evolving industry practices, including the increased use of digital communications. "The goal is to ensure that debt collection practices keep pace with how consumers actually communicate today, while maintaining strong protections against harassment and abuse." Among other things, the rules clarify permissible communications, reinforce substantiation and disclosure requirements, and strengthen consumer protections in line with broader trends seen at the federal level. These rules, which go effective later this year, apply not only to third-party collectors and buyers of consumer debt, but also to creditors of consumers whenever the debtor resides or is located in New York City. Collaboration with Federal and State Regulators Drawing on his prior experience at the Federal Trade Commission as Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection, Levine discussed the importance of coordination across jurisdictions. "There's a real opportunity for federal, state, and local regulators to work together and reinforce one another's efforts." He explained that DCWP frequently collaborates with the FTC, the New York State Attorney General's Office, and other enforcement bodies, particularly in cases involving multi-state or national conduct. At the same time, he made clear that local regulators can lead: "We don't have to wait. If we see harm affecting New Yorkers, we're going to act." Rulemaking as a Strategic Tool In addition to enforcement, Levine emphasized DCWP's increasing use of rulemaking to shape market behavior proactively. "Rules give clarity to businesses and protections to consumers—they're an important complement to case-by-case enforcement." He noted that clear rules can help level the playing field for companies that are already trying to do the right thing. Focus on Financial Services and Marketplace Innovation The conversation also explored DCWP's interest in financial services, particularly as new products and delivery models emerge. Levine pointed to risks associated with: 1.     Fintech innovations that may outpace regulatory frameworks 2.     Online platforms that obscure key terms or pricing 3.     Products that rely heavily on consumer inertia or behavioral biases "Innovation can be a good thing—but it can't come at the expense of transparency or fairness." Practical Takeaways for Industry For companies operating in or serving New York City, the message from DCWP is clear: 1.     Expect active enforcement of deceptive practices 2.     Monitor local regulatory developments, including mayoral directives and rulemaking initiatives 3.     Prioritize clear disclosures and consumer-friendly processes 4.     Anticipate continued focus on digital and subscription-based business models "Our goal is straightforward: markets should work for consumers, not against them." Looking Ahead Although our discussion did not cover it because it happened after our podcast was recorded, DCWP has since proposed a significant new rule targeting subscription practices—further underscoring the agency's commitment to addressing modern consumer risks and reflecting the policy direction set by Executive Order 10. Given Commissioner Levine's leadership and experience, including his prior role at the FTC, DCWP is likely to remain at the forefront of consumer protection innovation. Consumer Finance Monitor is hosted by Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel at Ballard Spahr, and the founder and former chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Services Group. We encourage listeners to subscribe to the podcast on their preferred platform for weekly insights into developments in the consumer finance industry.

In this Season 3 episode, co-hosts Valerie Mirko, Partner at Armstrong Teasdale LLP and leader of the firm's Securities Regulation and Litigation Practice, and William Nelson, Director of Public Policy and Associate General Counsel at the Investment Adviser Association, break down a timely set of regulatory and legislative developments shaping today's securities landscape. Valerie and William discuss the recent appointment of David Woodcock as the SEC's Director of Enforcement and how he is expected to continue Chairman Atkins's focus on investor harm. Valerie also notes that, despite a recent lull in rulemaking and few open meetings, there could be an “Atkins avalanche” of regulatory activity, with as many as two dozen rules proposed during his tenure. They further explore Chairman Atkins's recent speeches, in which he has suggested the SEC may codify certain existing no-action guidance through formal rulemaking. William also previews next month's episode, which will cover the Department of Labor's recent rule that could allow retirement plans to invest more heavily in alternative assets such as private equity and digital assets. This episode is a must-listen for securities lawyers, compliance professionals, regulators, and anyone navigating today's rapidly evolving regulatory landscape.Recent Past Episodes of this Series:Congress Puts the SROs Under the Microscope: SEC Oversight, Transparency, and Reform (3/18/2026)⁠Congress Puts the SEC Under the Microscope: Accountability, Due Process, and Reform⁠ (2/11/2026)⁠⁠A Study in Contrasts: Innovation and Crypto versus the Crypto Fraud Landscape⁠⁠ (1/21/2026)⁠⁠⁠A Year of Change, Challenges, and What Comes Next⁠⁠⁠ (12/17/2025)⁠⁠⁠⁠When Washington Stops: What the 2025 Shutdown Means for the SEC and Congress Going Forward⁠⁠⁠⁠ (11/19/2025)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The SEC's New Direction: Enforcement and Governance in Focus⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (10/22/25) ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠From Memecoins to Custody: What Firms Need to Know About Crypto⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ (9/24/25)Please note, the positions and opinions expressed by the speakers are strictly their own, and do not necessarily represent the views of their employers, nor those of the D.C. Bar, its Board of Governors or co-sponsoring Communities and organizations.

We've launched a new project: FRTracker.app. It's a platform designed to help track what's happening across the regulatory state—rulemakings, agency actions, and the steady flow of activity coming out of administrative agencies.The goal is straightforward: make it easier to see what's changing, when it's changing, and why it matters.If you're an attorney, journalist, or researcher working in this space, we'd encourage you to take a look. And as always, feedback is not just welcome—it's essential. The website is FRTracker.app and we look forward to hearing from you or, if all is in order, your finding a way to make use of it in your practice area or work. Thanks so much!This Day in Legal History: First Official Meeting of the US Republican PartyOn March 20, 1854, the newly formed Republican Party held its first official meeting in Ripon, Wisconsin, marking a pivotal moment in American legal and political history. The party emerged in direct response to the passage of the Kansas–Nebraska Act, a controversial law that allowed new territories to decide the legality of slavery through popular sovereignty. This legislative shift effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise, which had previously set geographic limits on slavery's expansion.The outrage among anti-slavery activists, lawyers, and former members of existing parties led to a rapid political realignment. Legal debates at the time centered on Congress's authority over the territories and whether slavery could be restricted as a matter of federal law. These were not abstract questions—they went directly to the structure of the Constitution and the balance of power between federal authority and local control.The formation of the Republican Party reflected a growing belief that existing legal frameworks had failed to contain the spread of slavery. Within a few years, the party would become a major political force, culminating in the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860. By his reelection campaign in 1864, however, Lincoln ran under the banner of the National Union Party, a wartime coalition of Republicans and pro-Union Democrats.That shift did not necessarily reflect a rejection of the Republican Party itself, but it did signal unease with factionalism and the limits of party identity during a constitutional crisis. The rebranding was a strategic and legal-political move: to broaden support for the Union, stabilize governance, and frame the election as a referendum on national survival rather than partisan ideology.The legal disputes surrounding slavery, territorial governance, and federal authority would ultimately be resolved not just through legislation or court decisions, but through war and constitutional amendment. The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution would later eliminate slavery nationwide, fundamentally reshaping American law.What began as a meeting in a small Wisconsin town became a turning point in the legal history of the United States, illustrating how statutory change can rapidly destabilize existing legal and political orders.A federal judge in Oregon ruled that the Department of Health and Human Services cannot enforce a policy aimed at restricting gender-affirming care for minors, siding with 21 states and the District of Columbia. The challenged policy, issued by HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., declared such care unsafe and ineffective and warned that providers could lose access to Medicare and Medicaid funding. The states argued the policy was unlawful because it bypassed required rulemaking procedures and interfered with their authority to regulate medical practice.Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai granted summary judgment to the states and rejected the federal government's attempt to dismiss the case. While the court has not yet issued a full written opinion, it signaled that the policy will be formally invalidated, with further briefing ordered on the scope of relief. The states emphasized that the policy placed healthcare providers in a difficult position by threatening funding while conflicting with state laws that protect access to gender-affirming care.The federal government argued the policy was merely advisory and not subject to judicial review, but the court was not persuaded. State attorneys general described the ruling as a rejection of federal overreach and an affirmation that such healthcare remains lawful. The decision preserves access to care for transgender minors in the plaintiff states, at least for now.This case turns in part on whether the HHS policy qualifies as a “final agency action” that must go through notice-and-comment rulemaking under the APA. The states argued that even if labeled as guidance, the policy had real legal consequences—namely, threatening loss of federal funding—making it effectively binding. Courts often look beyond labels to the practical effect of agency actions, and here the judge appeared to agree that the policy could not avoid APA requirements simply by being framed as a statement rather than a formal rule. This issue, central to the dispute, frequently arises in challenges to modern administrative action.HHS Can't Block Trans Care Under Kennedy Edict, Court Says - Law360A coalition of eight states has sued to block Nexstar Media Group's $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna, even after the deal received approval from both the Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission. The states argue the merger would create excessive concentration in local television markets, giving the combined company control over stations reaching roughly 80% of U.S. households. They contend this market power would allow Nexstar to raise prices for cable and satellite providers and reduce competition for broadcast content.The lawsuit also raises concerns about the impact on local journalism, with state enforcers warning that consolidation could lead to newsroom cuts and less coverage of local issues. DirecTV filed a parallel challenge, similarly arguing that the deal would increase costs, reduce competition, and lead to more frequent service disruptions.Despite these objections, the FCC approved the merger with conditions, including the divestiture of several stations and commitments related to pricing and local news. Nexstar defended the deal as necessary to sustain local broadcasting and improve its ability to deliver journalism at scale.The case highlights a growing divide between federal regulators and state enforcers, with states increasingly willing to challenge mergers even after federal clearance. It also reflects broader concerns about consolidation in media markets and its downstream effects on both pricing and the availability of local news.States Sue To Block $6.2B Tegna Acquisition Despite Feds' OK - Law360In this piece I wrote for Forbes, I look at the Netherlands' decision to outsource the core infrastructure of its value-added tax (VAT) system to the U.S.-based company FAST Enterprises. This is not just a software contract—FAST is responsible for operating, maintaining, and running key components of the Dutch VAT system remotely. Given that VAT generates roughly €1.5 billion per week in revenue, the arrangement creates a situation where a critical stream of government funding depends, at least in part, on a system controlled outside the country.I explain that this introduces a new kind of risk: technical dependency can quickly become financial dependency. If VAT collection is disrupted for any reason, the government cannot simply pause operations—it must borrow, and markets may react immediately. That turns what appears to be an IT issue into a fiscal and potentially geopolitical one.The broader argument is that this reflects a deeper shift in how states operate. What looks like routine modernization is actually a trade-off between efficiency and control. By adopting what I describe as “VAT-as-a-service,” the Netherlands has effectively externalized part of its tax infrastructure, raising questions about who ultimately controls a core sovereign function.I also place this in a geopolitical context, noting that reliance on foreign-operated infrastructure can create indirect leverage, even without any explicit “off switch.” The concern is less about intentional disruption and more about exposure—legal, regulatory, or systemic—that comes with cross-border dependence.Finally, I argue that this is not just a Dutch issue but a European trend, as governments increasingly rely on private and often non-domestic vendors for critical systems. The key takeaway is that tax infrastructure decisions should be evaluated not just on cost and efficiency, but on sovereignty, jurisdiction, and contingency planning.Dutch VAT-As-A-Service And The Quiet Outsourcing Of Tax SovereigntyApologies for a double dose of me today – I wrote a piece for Yale's Journal of Regulation Notice & Comment blog examining how regulatory obligations change during notice-and-comment rulemaking. The core argument is that most analyses look at the wrong unit—entire rules—when the real substance of regulation lies in the individual obligations imposed on regulated parties. By breaking rules down into sentence-level commands, the analysis tracks what actually happens to those obligations from proposal to final rule.The data shows that only about one-third of proposed obligations survive into final rules in a recognizable form, while most are eliminated altogether. Agencies are far more likely to remove obligations than to revise them, suggesting that rulemaking operates less like incremental editing and more like a filtering process. At the same time, final rules frequently introduce entirely new obligations that were not present in the proposal.When obligations do carry over, their core legal force—whether something is required, prohibited, or permitted—almost never changes. This indicates that survival tends to preserve substance, even as most proposed provisions disappear. The analysis also finds significant variation across agencies, with some making minimal changes and others heavily restructuring their rules.The findings challenge the assumption that proposed rules are reliable previews of final regulatory requirements. Instead, they suggest that stakeholders may be commenting on provisions that are unlikely to survive, while final rules may include new obligations that were never clearly proposed. This reframes notice-and-comment as a process that selects and reshapes regulatory commands, rather than simply refining them.The key legal insight is that the notice-and-comment process may not function primarily as iterative refinement, but as a filtering system that determines which obligations survive into binding law. This matters because administrative law doctrine assumes that public comments help shape final rules through feedback on proposed text. If most obligations are discarded rather than revised, it raises questions about whether the process provides meaningful notice of what will ultimately bind regulated parties. That directly challenges conventional assumptions about how rulemaking works in practice.Only One-Third of Proposed Regulatory Obligations Survive to the Final Rule, by Andrew Leahey - Yale Journal on Regulation This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

In this episode, we explore the intricate process that transforms government proposals into enforceable rules, emphasizing the importance of procedure as substance in administrative law. Whether you're a law student preparing for exams or a legal professional, understanding the detailed mechanics of rulemaking and judicial review is essential to navigating the modern administrative state.Most companies survive regulatory chaos by meticulously following a procedural maze—fail to do so, and their entire operation could be invalidated. This episode unmasks the shadowy world of federal rulemaking, revealing how powerful, yet oddly fragile, administrative procedures really are. If you're a lawyer, a policy professional, or a citizen eager to understand how the government's hidden gears turn, this deep dive will transform your perspective on regulatory power.Imagine waking up to a $10 million fine after a vague memo, with no debate in Congress, suddenly binding your company to a law you never voted on. It's not fiction—it's modern administrative law. You'll discover: how unelected agencies quietly craft regulations that can bankrupt industries, the difference between rulemaking and adjudication, and why procedure is everything in the modern state. We unlock the intricate “plumbing” of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), explaining how agencies make rules—from initial notice and the infamous notice and comment process to complex tests like the American Mining Congress analysis. You'll learn to carve through legal jargon, spot agency cheats, and understand how courts evaluate whether agency actions are truly justified.We break down: how agencies evade procedural traps with interpretive or guidance memos, the four-factor test to “unmask” legislative rules, and the critical importance of the administrative record—the dossier that defends agency decisions in court. You'll see concrete case studies: the FDA's chocolate milk ban, the funny but revealing saga of trucker rest rules, and the landmark Motor Vehicle Safety case that redefined what makes a regulation rational. Getting this right can mean the difference between a regulation standing or crashing down—crucial knowledge for anyone involved in law, policy, or simply wanting to grasp how our government really works.Why does all this matter? Because ignoring procedural protections can lead to unchecked bureaucratic power, and slipping up can invalidate decades of policy and billions of dollars. In the era of AI floodgates and rapid rule changes, understanding these safeguards is more vital than ever. We explore the potential chaos if algorithms flood the system with millions of fabricated comments and how courts might respond.This episode is perfect for law students preparing for the bar, policymakers navigating the complex landscape, or citizens seeking to decode the opaque machinery of government. It's a whirlwind tour that arms you with the analytical frameworks to spot agency missteps, defend or challenge regulations, and understand the delicate balance between political influence and legal discipline. Whether you're aiming for exam mastery or practical insight, mastering procedural plumbing in administrative law isn't just academic—it's a superpower.

This week, Michael and Vance sat down to discuss the macro impact of Middle East tensions on oil and markets, the SEC's crypto asset rulemaking, private credit liquidity risks, Tempo's mainnet launch, the agentic payments landscape, and the sustained growth trajectory of AI foundational models and GPU compute demand. Thanks for tuning in! – Follow Oneshot: https://x.com/OneshotPodBW Follow Framework Ventures: https://x.com/hiFramework Follow Michael: https://x.com/im_manderson Follow Vance: https://x.com/pythianism Subscribe on YouTube: ⁠http://bit.ly/4aytFti⁠ Subscribe on Apple: ⁠https://bit.ly/4aJwHen⁠ Subscribe on Spotify: ⁠https://bit.ly/4rZkkSt⁠ —- Timestamps (00:00) Introduction (00:47) Macro Outlook (09:12) SEC Crypto Rulemaking (12:57) State of the Market (23:42) Impact of BDCs (29:02) Tempo & Agentic Payments (37:54) Intersection of Crypto & AI —-- Disclaimer: Nothing said on Oneshot is a recommendation to buy or sell securities or tokens. This podcast is for informational purposes only, and any views expressed by anyone on the show are solely our opinions, not financial advice. Michael, Vance and our guests may hold positions in the companies, funds, or projects discussed, and our guests may hold positions in the companies, funds, or projects discussed.

Most administrative laws sneak through in the shadows—yet their impact on your life is anything but invisible. Did you know that agencies can create binding rules without the usual public scrutiny? Whether you're a law student, lawyer, or just curious about how government really governs, this episode will reshape your understanding of the administrative state.We dive into the core of the APA, unraveling how agencies decide whether to make laws through rulemaking or adjudication—and why this magic procedure profoundly alters legal consequences. You'll discover: the crucial taxonomy of agency actions, the difference between legislative rules, interpretive rules, and policy statements, and how each type triggers different procedures and judicial reviews. We clarify common exam traps, like mislabeling binding laws as non-binding guidance, and provide concrete checklists to classify agency actions with confidence.You'll learn how procedural nuances—like notice and comment, the logical outgrowth doctrine, and good cause exceptions—shape the legality of agency actions. We explore the rare but critical formal procedures and why most agency decisions are informal, yet still subject to constitutional or statutory obligations. Plus, we examine the strategic choice agencies make between rulemaking and adjudication, and the dangers of retroactivity when policy shifts occur in courts and hearings.Most importantly, you'll grasp the jaw-dropping stakes: how procedural missteps can invalidate even the most consequential regulations—like pollution standards or license revocations. This episode arms you with the analytical tools to spot the subtle, invisible wiring in the regulatory maze and understand the grand compromise of the APA: flexibility balanced with accountability.Perfect for law students preparing for exams, legal professionals, or anyone interested in the real machinery behind government power, this episode will empower you to see beyond the labels and understand the functional substance of agency actions. As courts tighten scrutiny, the future of administrative law hangs in the balance—will agencies adapt or risk losing their shadowy influence? Tune in to master the framework that keeps the invisible wiring from turning into walls, and to stay ahead in today's evolving administrative landscape.

A video of this podcast is available on YouTube, Spotify, or PwC's website at viewpoint.pwc.com.It's that time of year, with many focused on year-end reporting. After wrapping up our Year-end toolkit series, we revisit another set of conversations that are especially relevant right now. We're re-releasing the kickoff episode from our SEC now series.This first episode sets the stage with an overview of current developments shaping SEC reporting. Our guests unpack recent leadership changes, the evolving rulemaking agenda, reporting themes, and key trends in SEC comment letters.In this episode, we discuss:1:59 – SEC leadership updates7:28 – Rulemaking agenda and expected priorities14:25 – Rulemaking challenges: staff capacity and shutdown constraints16:57 – SEC comment letter themes and focus areasFor more on this topic listen to the other episodes in our SEC now and Inside SEC reporting series.Be sure to follow this podcast on your favorite podcast app and subscribe to our weekly newsletter to stay in the loop. About our guestsScott Feely is a PwC National Office Deputy Chief Accountant. He has over 30 years of experience supporting clients as they address the SEC and financial reporting implications of their capital markets and merger and acquisition-related activities. Lindsay McCord is a PwC National Office partner specializing in matters related to the SEC and the capital markets. Prior to joining PwC, Lindsay spent over 15 years at the SEC, most recently as the Chief Accountant in the Division of Corporation Finance. In this role, Lindsay led an accounting team in providing technical accounting and reporting support to the Division, including SEC rulemaking, interpretation, and guidance. About our guest hostKyle Moffatt is PwC's Professional Practice leader, leading a team responsible for working with standard setters and regulators as well as delivering brand-defining thought leadership and educational materials. He also consults with engagement teams and audit clients on SEC reporting matters. Before PwC, Kyle spent almost 20 years with the SEC, most recently as Chief Accountant and Disclosure Program Director in the Division of Corporation Finance.Transcripts available upon request for individuals who may need a disability-related accommodation. Please send requests to us_podcast@pwc.com. Did you enjoy this episode? Text us your thoughts and be sure to include the episode name.

In an unprecedented action, the SEC in July dismissed with prejudice a pending enforcement case concerning an alleged violation of a rule promulgated under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (ICA). In 2023, the SEC had charged the defendants (a mutual fund, its investment advisor, and independent directors of the fund) with violating its 2016 “liquidity rule,” which limits the percentage of assets investment companies may hold in "illiquid" investments. The independent directors argued that the ICA did not authorize the SEC to make rules concerning fund liquidity and that its decision to do so based on a protection of investors rationale was owed no deference under the 2024 Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright.The district court ordered supplemental briefing on Loper Bright implications, but before the SEC filed its supplemental response, it dismissed the case against all defendants, citing “policy reasons”, without more explanation. Our panelists will discuss the numerous legal and policy issues and questions raised by this sequence of events. Featuring:Jan Folena, Partner and Co-Chair of Securities & Regulatory Enforcement, Stradley RononMargaret Little, Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance(Moderator) Michael Piwowar, Executive Vice President, Milken Institute Finance

A visit by dairy producers and dignitaries at the white House Wednesday.

The FTC may be quietly reviving its controversial Click-to-Cancel rule — and companies with subscription or auto-renewal programs should take notice. After the Eighth Circuit vacated the original rule on procedural grounds, consumer groups petitioned the FTC to reopen the rulemaking, and the Commission has now invited public comment, signaling that federal scrutiny of cancellation practices is far from over. For legal, compliance, and marketing teams, this development underscores the ongoing risk around negative-option offers and the need to evaluate enrollment disclosures and cancellation flows now, not later. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Gonzalo E. Mon, Donnelly L. McDowell, and Aaron J. Burstein.

In our final Freedom to Learn episode of the year, Darla Romfo, President and CEO of the Children's Scholarship Fund, joins the podcast to trace the origins of the nation's most influential privately-funded school choice efforts. Darla recounts how CSF's founders, Ted Forstmann and John Walton, sparked a national movement by empowering low-income families with […]

In this episode, we debrief the 2025 AICPA Conference in Washington, DC, highlighting key takeaways including perspectives from SEC Chairman Paul Atkins and other regulatory leaders. Topics include the SEC's rulemaking priorities for 2026, trends in capital formation, and emerging issues such as AI and cryptocurrency. We also explore practical reminders for year-end reporting and insights into international standard setting collaboration.In this episode, we discuss:6:42 – SEC Chair keynote: “Making IPOs great again”12:51 – Emerging issues: AI, crypto, and international standard setting25:08 – SEC shutdown impacts and capital markets backlog32:06 – Rulemaking outlook and year-end reminders47:08 – PCAOB oversight, inspections, and audit standard-setting themesFor more, read our In depth, 2025 AICPA & CIMA Conference: Current SEC and PCAOB Developments.Be sure to follow this podcast on your favorite podcast app and subscribe to our weekly newsletter to stay in the loop.About our guestsKevin Vaughn is a PwC National Office partner specializing in SEC reporting matters. Kevin leverages his extensive experience to support PwC public company and pre-IPO clients on accounting and SEC reporting matters. Prior to joining PwC in 2023, Kevin spent over 18 years at the SEC, most recently serving on the leadership team in the SEC's Office of the Chief Accountant where he focused on technical accounting consultations, SEC rulemakings, and standard setting matters.Scott Feely is a PwC National Office Deputy Chief Accountant. He has over 30 years of experience supporting clients as they address the SEC and financial reporting implications of their capital markets and merger and acquisition-related activities.About our guest hostKyle Moffatt is PwC's Professional Practice leader, leading a team responsible for working with standard setters and regulators as well as delivering brand-defining thought leadership and educational materials. He also consults with engagement teams and audit clients on SEC reporting matters. Before PwC, Kyle spent almost 20 years with the SEC, most recently as Chief Accountant and Disclosure Program Director in the Division of Corporation Finance.Transcripts available upon request for individuals who may need a disability-related accommodation. Please send requests to us_podcast@pwc.comDid you enjoy this episode? Text us your thoughts and be sure to include the episode name.

In the November episode of the President's Spotlight, Dr. Jason Crowell talks with Dr. Natalia Rost about the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services final rule for how physicians are reimbursed in 2026.  Show reference:  https://www.aan.com/about-the-aan/presidents-spotlight  

In this episode, we kick off a new SEC-focused series with an overview of current developments shaping SEC reporting. Our guests unpack recent leadership changes, the evolving rulemaking agenda, reporting themes, and key trends in SEC comment letters.In this episode, we discuss:1:54 – SEC leadership updates8:31 – Rulemaking agenda and expected priorities15:29 – Rulemaking challenges: staff capacity and shutdown constraints18:27 – Government shutdown effects on IPOs and the SEC review process24:09 – SEC comment letter themes and focus areasFor more, listen to our recent episode on frequency of reporting, SEC to revisit quarterly reporting: Pros, cons, and what's ahead. Also, check out our SEC reporting series from earlier this year where we take a “back to basics” look at key reporting areas:Inside SEC reporting: Capital formationInside SEC reporting: Acquisitions and divestituresInside SEC reporting: Pro forma financial informationInside SEC reporting: Form 8-K (current report)Be sure to follow this podcast on your favorite podcast app and subscribe to our weekly newsletter to stay in the loop.About our guestsScott Feely is a PwC National Office Deputy Chief Accountant. He has over 30 years of experience supporting clients as they address the SEC and financial reporting implications of their capital markets and merger and acquisition-related activities.Lindsay McCord is a PwC National Office partner specializing in matters related to the SEC and the capital markets. Prior to joining PwC, Lindsay spent over 15 years at the SEC, most recently as the Chief Accountant in the Division of Corporation Finance. In this role, Lindsay led an accounting team in providing technical accounting and reporting support to the Division, including SEC rulemaking, interpretation, and guidance.About our guest hostKyle Moffatt is PwC's Professional Practice leader, leading a team responsible for working with standard setters and regulators as well as delivering brand-defining thought leadership and educational materials. He also consults with engagement teams and audit clients on SEC reporting matters. Before PwC, Kyle spent almost 20 years with the SEC, most recently as Chief Accountant and Disclosure Program Director in the Division of Corporation Finance.Transcripts available upon request for individuals who may need a disability-related accommodation. Please send requests to us_podcast@pwc.comDid you enjoy this episode? Text us your thoughts and be sure to include the episode name.

A recent NAD decision is bringing renewed attention to the FTC's shelved concept of “review hijacking” — using reviews from one product to promote another. NAD found that a supplement brand improperly combined reviews for two “substantially different” products, echoing the FTC's earlier language and signaling that review accuracy remains a live issue under existing advertising standards. The takeaway for advertisers: make sure product reviews truly match the item being sold. Hosted by Simone Roach. Based on a blog post by Ioana Gorecki and John E. Villafranco

Senator Runestad joins Steve to discuss his newly introduced bill aimed at reforming Michigan's broken rulemaking process. He explains how unelected bureaucrats have gained too much power, creating and enforcing regulations without proper legislative oversight. The Senator's proposal would restore accountability, transparency, and balance between the legislative and executive branches, ensuring rules serve the people, not the agencies. They talk about how excessive red tape strangles small businesses, drives up costs, and limits individual freedom, and how this reform could finally bring common sense back to Lansing.

In this episode of the Pipeliners Podcast, Jim Curry of Babst Calland returns for an in-depth discussion on current and upcoming PHMSA rulemakings.  The conversation covers the agency's evolving focus on risk-based, technology-driven regulation — including the growing role of AI and advanced analytical tools — and what these changes mean for operators. Curry also provides insights into regulatory reform, repair criteria modernization, and how industry can engage proactively to shape durable, data-driven rules that improve safety and efficiency.   Visit PipelinePodcastNetwork.com for a full episode transcript, as well as detailed show notes with relevant links and insider term definitions.

In this crossover episode of Payments Pros and The Consumer Finance Podcast, Carlin McCrory is joined by colleague Kim Phan to discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB) recent developments regarding Section 1033 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). This summer, the CFPB initiated a new rulemaking process, inviting industry comments on its final rule concerning personal financial data rights. With a deadline of October 21 for public comments, industry participants are encouraged to weigh in on access to consumer financial information.Kim and Carlin discuss the strategic implications of the CFPB's reconsideration of the 1033 open banking rule, highlighting the agency's focus on consumer representatives, privacy, security, fee structures, and compliance timelines. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Lynn Nonnemaker joins Julia Grabo to discuss what Medicare Advantage (MA) and Part D proposals have been finalized, and, more importantly, which ones have not yet been addressed.

This episode delves into the SEC's current Commission, now a 3-1 majority, its application of regulations in rulemaking and exam priorities, and its approach to exam remediation. We examine impacts of new directors, recent asset management enforcement actions and overall trends, what we are seeing in exams within the context of registered funds and private funds, and the meteoric rise of retail access to alternative funds which we expect to be the SEC's focus in the future. Episode Resources:09.04.25 Simpson Thacher SEC Watch: Monthly Takeaways for Asset Managers - September 202508.12.25 Simpson Thacher Partners Author Bloomberg Law Article on Potential Enforcement Changes to SEC Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-807.15.25 SEC Drops First Ever Liquidity Rule Suit Against Mutual Fund Adviser and Officers and TrusteesMeet Your Episode Hosts:Adam S. Aderton, Simpson ThacherPartner, Asset Management Regulatory and Enforcement; former Co-Chief of the SEC's Asset Management UnitJustin L. Browder, Simpson ThacherPartner, Asset Management Regulatory and EnforcementMichael J. Osnato, Jr., Simpson ThacherPartner and Head of the Firm's Asset Management Regulatory and Enforcement Practice; former Chief of the SEC's Complex Financial Instruments UnitContact UsTo learn more, visit us at www.regulatoryroundtablepodcast.com. If you have any questions or any topics you would like to hear covered, contact us at regulatoryroundtable@stblaw.com. This podcast was recorded and is being made available by Simpson Thacher for general informational purposes only. Listeners should not consider the information available via this podcast to be an invitation for an attorney-client relationship, should not rely on the information provided during the podcast as legal advice for any purpose, and should always seek the legal advice of competent counsel in the relevant jurisdiction. Listeners should not act, or refrain from acting, based on any information made available via this podcast, and Simpson Thacher expressly disclaims all liability in respect of actions taken or not taken based on any contents of this podcast. By accessing this podcast you acknowledge that Simpson Thacher makes no warranty, guaranty, or representation as to the accuracy or sufficiency of the information featured in the podcast. The views, information, or opinions expressed during this podcast series are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect those of Simpson Thacher.

In April, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to rescind a regulation defining the Endangered Species Act’s prohibition against “harm” to an endangered species to include destruction and modification of habitat. That regulation was previously upheld by the Supreme Court under Chevron in Sweet Home v. Babbitt, over a sharp dissent by Justice Scalia accusing the agency of imposing “unfairness to the point of financial ruin—not just upon the rich, but upon the simplest farmer who finds his land conscripted to national zoological use.” Citing Loper Bright’s overturning of Chevron, the Service proposes to rescind this regulation and adopt Justice Scalia’s opinion as the best reading of the statute. This would substantially curtail regulation of habitat, the loss of which is purportedly the leading threat to endangered species. Join this FedSoc Forum in discussing this proposal, its interpretation of the Endangered Species Act, and the effect of Loper Bright on agencies’ modification of regulations previously upheld under Chevron. Featuring: Karrigan Börk, Professor of Law, UC Davis School of Law; Senior Fellow, California Environmental Law and Policy Center; and Director, UC Davis Center for Watershed SciencesWill Yeatman, Senior Legal Fellow, Pacific Legal Foundation(Moderator) Jonathan Wood, Vice President of Law & Policy, Property and Environment Research Center

The Trump administration has been rolling out a series of acquisition reforms in small chunks over the summer. Now the administration is preparing to debut a formal rule making this fall. The goal is to streamline and simplify the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or the FAR. For more, Federal News Network's Justin Doubleday joins me now. See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Resources mentioned in this episode:Blog Post: Fee Rebate for FINRA Member FirmsBlog Post: FINRA Forward Initiatives to Support Members, Markets and the Investors They ServeRequest for Comment: Outside Activities Rule—2025-05Rule Proposal: Gifts Rule—2025-003 Subscribe to our show on Apple Podcasts, Google Play and by RSS. Find us: LinkedIn / X / YouTube / Facebook / Instagram / E-mailSubscribe to our show on Apple Podcasts, Google Play and by RSS.

In this episode of The Tactics Meeting, Dan Smiley talks with Lovel Pratt of Friends of the San Juans about the group's participation in Washington State's oil spill rulemaking process, their concerns around increased tanker traffic near the San Juan Islands, and the risks posed by non-floating oils such as diluted bitumen. As a member of the Puget Sound Harbor Safety Committee and Ecology's Best Achievable Protection workgroups, Lovel brings an environmental perspective to the table. We discuss where those concerns align—or don't—with the maritime industry's view of risk, safety, and prevention in a region with one of the most robust marine safety regimes in the world.

The Department of Education just dropped a negotiated rulemaking announcement, and while it might sound like dry policy talk, this one's worth your attention — especially if you're pursuing Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF), on Pay As You Earn (PAYE), or using Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR). Learn what negotiated rulemaking actually means, why it matters, and what kinds of changes could be on the horizon for federal student loan repayment. We'll also walk through the strategy behind these proposed updates, what the timeline might look like, and the political and legal dynamics that could affect how this all plays out. Key moments: (03:20) My initial take: borrowers don't need to panic just yet — and here's why (05:35) What these changes could actually mean for PSLF borrowers (06:59) PAYE and ICR might be affected, but IBR is protected by statute  (10:49) The GOP proposal targets nonprofit hospitals, but I don't think it'll go anywhere (12:34) With 2026 elections in sight, student loan overhauls will probably stay pretty modest Like the show? There are several ways you can help! Follow on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Amazon Music Leave an honest review on Apple Podcasts  Subscribe to the newsletter Feeling helpless when it comes to your student loans? Try our free student loan calculator Check out our refinancing bonuses we negotiated Book your custom student loan plan Get profession-specific financial planning Do you have a question about student loans? Leave us a voicemail here or email us at help@studentloanplanner.com and we might feature it in an upcoming show!  

Tracing its origins to the Air Commerce Act of 1926, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) was established in 1967 as an independent agency inside the U.S. DOT charged with investigating why transportation accidents happen. In 1974, it became an independent federal agency separate from the DOT. Although largely focused on aviation, the agency also investigates roadway, marine, pipeline, and railroad accidents, as well as those involving commercial space. Today, we talk with Robert L. Sumwalt—currently executive director of the Boeing Center for Aviation and Aerospace Safety at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and former chair of the NTSB—about that agency's ongoing mission to investigate accidents and recommend improvements that make travel safer for everyone who uses our transportation network. 

The Supreme Court will consider a case at the end of March that could limit Congress' ability to let federal regulators determine what public health and safety standards are necessary. Depending on what the court decides, any statute that grants discretion to an agency could be open for re-review, said Jessica Ellsworth, a partner at Hogan Lovells. "There's probably hundreds of thousands of places in the US code that there are terms used like 'in the public interest,' whether something is 'necessary' and 'appropriate,' whether something is 'reasonable,' whether something is 'fair' or 'unfair,' whether it's 'essential,'" she said. Ellsworth joins Cases and Controversies hosts Greg Stohr and Lydia Wheeler to discuss the nondelegation doctrine and how this legal principle, which the court has been asked to revive, could impact the federal telecom subsidy program at issue and other regulations more broadly. The hosts also chat about a social media post from President Donald Trump that garnered a rare response from Chief Justice John Roberts. Do you have feedback on this episode of Cases and Controversies? Give us a call and leave a voicemail at 703-341-3690.

  The Friday Five for March 7, 2025: Starbucks and Dunkin' Spring 2025 Menus Amazon Announces Alexa+ Changes to MA and Part D Disaster/Emergency SEP Effects of ACA Subsidy Expiration by Demographic Clarification on HHS Proposed Rule Comment Periods   Starbucks and Dunkin' Spring 2025 Menus: Beams, Sophia. “Dunkin' Brings Back Two Fan-Favorite Drinks Just in Time for Spring.” Bhg.Com, Better Homes & Gardens, 5 Mar. 2025, www.bhg.com/dunkin-spring-menu-2025-11690288. Tyko, Kelly. “Dunkin' Spring Menu Launches, Nondairy Surcharge Removed.” Axios.Com, Axios, 5 Mar. 2025, www.axios.com/2025/03/05/dunkin-spring-menu-2025-dunkalatte-pistachio-coffee. “New Iced Cherry Chai Joins Lavender Drinks on Starbucks Spring Menu.” About.Starbucks.Com, Starbucks, 3 Mar. 2025, about.starbucks.com/stories/2025/new-iced-cherry-chai-joins-lavender-drinks-on-starbucks-spring-menu/. Palan, Michael. “We Tried Starbucks' New Spring Menu Items, and These 2 Drinks Stole the Show.” Tastingtable.Com, Tasting Table, 3 Mar. 2025, www.tastingtable.com/1801587/starbucks-reserve-new-spring-menu-2025-drinks-food/.   Amazon Announces Alexa+: “50 Things to Try with Alexa+.” Aboutamazon.Comt, Amazon, 26 Feb. 2025, www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/new-alexa-top-features. Haselton, Todd, et al. “Amazon Alexa Event Live Blog: All the News from the Keynote.” Theverge.Com, The Verge, 26 Feb. 2025, www.theverge.com/news/618261/amazon-alexa-event-live-blog-2025. Panay, Panos. “Introducing Alexa+, the next Generation of Alexa.” Aboutamazon.Com, Amazon, 26 Feb. 2025, www.aboutamazon.com/news/devices/new-alexa-generative-artificial-intelligence. Diaz, Maria. “Not All Echo Devices Will Get Alexa+ Initially - See If Yours Made the List.” Zdnet.Com, ZDNET, 28 Feb. 2025, www.zdnet.com/article/alexa-plus-will-run-on-select-echo-devices-see-if-yours-is-on-the-list/. Ellis, Cat. “Want to Try Alexa+? Here Are the Echo Devices It'll Work On.” Techradar.Com, TechRadar, 27 Feb. 2025, www.techradar.com/home/smart-speakers/want-to-try-alexa-plus-here-are-the-echo-devices-itll-work-on. Aten, Jason. “With Its AI-Powered Alexa+, Amazon Just Put Apple on Notice.” Inc.Com, Inc, 26 Feb. 2025, www.inc.com/jason-aten/with-its-ai-powered-alexa-plus-amazon-just-put-apple-on-notice/91153371. Stanley, Alyse. “You Can Get Alexa+ Early — Here's How to Sign up.” Tomsguide.Com, Tom's Guide, 1 Mar. 2025, www.tomsguide.com/ai/you-can-get-alexa-early-heres-how-to-sign-up.   Changes to MA and Part D Disaster/Emergency SEP: Crowe, Edward. “New Medicare FEMA SEP Rules.” Pfsinsurance.Com, Pinnacle Financial Services, 29 Jan. 2025, pfsinsurance.com/blog/new-medicare-fema-sep-rules-crowe-associates. “Change to Beneficiary Use of the SEP for Individuals Affected by a Government Entity-Declared Disaster or Other Emergency.” Cms.Gov, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 3 Dec. 2024, 20178637.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/20178637/42%20ea%20-%20Product%20Profile.pdf.   Effects of ACA Subsidy Expiration by Demographic: Lambrew, Jeanne. “Enhanced ACA Marketplace Tax Credits Worked—And Shouldn't Be Eliminated.” Tcf.Org, The Century Foundation, 7 Aug. 2024, tcf.org/content/commentary/enhanced-aca-marketplace-tax-credits-worked-and-shouldnt-be-eliminated/. Richards, Carson, and Sara  R. Collins. “Enhanced Premium Tax Credits for ACA Health Plans: Who They Help, and Who Gets Hurt If They're Not Extended.” Commonwealthfund.Org, Commonwealth Fund, 18 Feb. 2025, www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/explainer/2025/feb/enhanced-premium-tax-credits-aca-health-plans. Sullivan, Jennifer. “Enhanced Tax Credits Keep ACA Marketplace Coverage Affordable for 2025.” Cbpp.Org, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 18 Nov. 2024, www.cbpp.org/blog/enhanced-tax-credits-keep-aca-marketplace-coverage-affordable-for-2025. “How Much More Would People Pay in Premiums If the ACA's Enhanced Subsidies Expired?” Kff.Org, KFF, 18 Dec. 2024, https://www.kff.org/interactive/how-much-more-would-people-pay-in-premiums-if-the-acas-enhanced-subsidies-expired/ Ortaliza, Jared, et al. “Inflation Reduction Act Health Insurance Subsidies: What Is Their Impact and What Would Happen If They Expire?” Kff.Org, KFF, 26 July 2024, www.kff.org/affordable-care-act/issue-brief/inflation-reduction-act-health-insurance-subsidies-what-is-their-impact-and-what-would-happen-if-they-expire/. Banthin, Jessica, et al. “Who Benefits from Enhanced Premium Tax Credits in the Marketplace?” Urban.Org, Urban Institute, June 2024, www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/Who_Benefits_from_Enhanced_Premium_Tax_Credits_in_the_Marketplace.pdf. Lo, Justin, and Cynthia Cox. “Who Might Lose Eligibility for Affordable Care Act Marketplace Subsidies If Enhanced Tax Credits Are Not Extended?” Kff.Com, KFF, 28 Feb. 2025, www.kff.org/policy-watch/who-might-lose-eligibility-for-affordable-care-act-marketplace-subsidies-if-enhanced-tax-credits-are-not-extended/.   Clarification on HHS Proposed Rule Comment Periods: “Compilation of the Social Security Laws.” Ssa.Gov, Social Security Administration, www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title18/1871.htm. Accessed 5 Mar. 2025. “HHS Rescinds Policy Regarding Notice-and-Comment Rulemaking – Implications for Health Care Industry.” Www.Hoganlovells.Com, Hogan Lovells, 3 Mar. 2025, www.hoganlovells.com/en/publications/hhs-rescinds-policy-regarding-noticeandcomment-rulemaking-implications-for-health-care-industry. “Policy on Adhering to the Text of the Administrative Procedure Act.” Federalregister.Gov, Federal Register, 3 Mar. 2025, www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/03/03/2025-03300/policy-on-adhering-to-the-text-of-the-administrative-procedure-act. Goldman, Maya. “RFK Jr. Move to Kill Public Comment Roils Providers.” Axios.Com, Axios, 3 Mar. 2025, www.axios.com/2025/03/03/rfk-transparency-rule-elimination-fallout. Cueto, Isabella. “RFK Jr. Moves to Eliminate Public Comment on HHS Decisions.” Statnews.Com, STAT, 28 Feb. 2025, www.statnews.com/2025/02/28/rfk-jr-eliminating-public-comment-hhs-decisions-richardson-waiver/. Muoio, Dave. “RFK Jr. Orders HHS to End ‘extra-Statutory' Notice, Public Comment Process in Rulemaking.” Fiercehealthcare.Com, Fierce Healthcare, 3 Mar. 2025, www.fiercehealthcare.com/regulatory/rfk-jr-orders-hhs-end-notice-public-comment-process-rulemaking. Howe, Amy. “Supreme Court Strikes down Chevron, Curtailing Power of Federal Agencies.” Scotusblog.Com, SCOTUSblog, 26 July 2024, www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-chevron-curtailing-power-of-federal-agencies/.   Resources: Diversify Your Insurance Portfolio & Reap Real Rewards: https://lnk.to/asg651 FAQs About Registering with Ritter Insurance Marketing: https://ritterim.com/blog/faqs-about-registering-with-ritter-insurance-marketing/   How To Better Market Yourself: https://ritterim.com/blog/how-to-better-market-yourself/   Medicare Advantage Open Enrollment Do's and Don'ts: https://lnk.to/oRft1p SNP Summit Registration is Live: https://lnk.to/asgf20250228   Follow Us on Social! Ritter on Facebook, https://www.facebook.com/RitterIM Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/ritter.insurance.marketing/ LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/company/ritter-insurance-marketing TikTok, https://www.tiktok.com/@ritterim X, https://x.com/RitterIM and Youtube, https://www.youtube.com/user/RitterInsurance     Sarah on LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/in/sjrueppel/ Instagram, https://www.instagram.com/thesarahjrueppel/ and Threads, https://www.threads.net/@thesarahjrueppel  Tina on LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/in/tina-lamoreux-6384b7199/   Not affiliated with or endorsed by Medicare or any government agency. Contact the Agent Survival Guide Podcast! Email us ASGPodcast@Ritterim.com or call 1-717-562-7211 and leave a voicemail.

Across America, in sprawling university teaching facilities and in picturesque rural hospitals, administrators are dealing with a powerful tool called statistical extrapolation.When auditors say that they're using statistical “sampling” to review your Medicare claims, what they are often doing is using extrapolation – which could take what might appear to be minor discrepancies in your billing and turn them into major financial obligations.To learn more about extrapolation and what it means for you and your team, the producers of RACmonitor have invited senior healthcare analyst Frank Cohen to be the special guest during the next live edition of Monitor Mondays.The venerable weekly Internet broadcast will also include these instantly recognizable features:• Monday Rounds: Ronald Hirsch, MD, vice president of R1 RCM, will be making his Monday Rounds.• The RAC Report: Healthcare attorney Knicole Emanuel, partner at the law firm of Nelson Mullins, will report the latest news about auditors.• Risky Business: Healthcare attorney David Glaser, shareholder in the law offices of Fredrikson & Byron, will join the broadcast with his trademark segment.• Legislative Update: Cate Brantley, senior government affairs liaison for Zelis, will report on the latest news concerning healthcare legislation.

#ThisMorning on #BRN | #Retirement | #1997 | What a New Labor Secretary May Mean for Benefit Plan Rulemaking  | David Levine & Kevin Walsh, Groom Law Group | #Tunein: broadcastretirementnetwork.com #Aging, #Finance, #Lifestyle, #Privacy, #Retirement, #Wellness and #More - #Everyday

In this episode of the Pipeliners Podcast, host Russel Treat is joined by Jim Curry of Babst Calland to discuss the new notice of preliminary rulemaking from PHMSA regarding CO2.  Visit PipelinePodcastNetwork.com for a full episode transcript, as well as detailed show notes with relevant links and insider term definitions. 

Phillip Brown: Water/Wastewater/Stormwater Superintendent at The City of Jacksonville Beach in Florida. In this episode we chat about his love for travel and where he would see himself operating overseas. Also we cover topics like Legislation and Rulemaking in the water field. Give the show a listen and remember to thank your local Public Works Professionals.

It wouldn't be an outgoing administration without some last minute political intrigue. This time it's the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (an agency firmly in the crosshairs of Elon Musk's DOGE) attempting to impose rules on crypto payments. Sponsored by: Ledn Need liquidity without selling your Bitcoin? For 6+ years, Ledn has been the trusted choice for Bitcoin-backed lending. With transparency, security, and trust at our core, we help you access your BTC's wealth while HODLing. Discover what your Bitcoin can do at ledn.io/borrowing. Enjoying this content? SUBSCRIBE to the Podcast: https://pod.link/1438693620 Watch on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/nathanielwhittemorecrypto Subscribe to the newsletter: https://breakdown.beehiiv.com/ Join the discussion: https://discord.gg/VrKRrfKCz8 Follow on Twitter: NLW: https://twitter.com/nlw Breakdown: https://twitter.com/BreakdownNLW

Welcome to the American Railroading Podcast! In this episode our host Don Walsh is joined by guest Eamonn Patrick, Transportation Specialist, Standards and Rulemaking, for the U.S. Department of Transportation, Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Together they discuss who PHMSA is, what PHMSA does, and they do a deep dive into several pending and proposed rules including HM-264 regarding the shipping of LNG by rail tank cars and the recent HM-265 docket issued 10/28/24 regarding the proposed removal of sole delegated authority from the AAR Tank Car Committee for the approval of tank car designs and Quality Assurance Programs. Tune in to this episode to gain valuable insights and broaden your understanding of American Railroading. You can find the episode on the American Railroading Podcast's official website at www.AmericanRailroading.net . Welcome aboard!KEY POINTS: The American Railroading Podcast remains in the Top 10% of all podcasts globally!PHMSA is divided into two parts, the Office of Hazmat Safety which focuses on hazmat shipments made by rail, highway, air and vessel; and the Office of Pipeline Safety.There are 1.2 million hazmat shipments by all modes of transportation daily.Hazmat shipments in the U.S. arrive at destination safely 99.99995% of the time.PHMSA's focus is to create regulations that address any safety issues that are present in each mode of hazmat transportation in the U.S.PHMSA is also a resource including offering grant programs for first responders.As a part of the Department of Transportation, PHMSA sometimes receives mandates for rule makings directly from Congress.The proposed changes to the current rail tank car design and QAP processes in HM-265 is meant to mirror the current regulations regarding Highway tanks.Any questions you may have regarding the safe transportation of hazardous materials can be addressed by calling the DOT Hazmat Info Center at (800) 467-4922.Stay tuned for our next episode!LINKS MENTIONED: https://www.americanrailroading.nethttps://www.therevolutionrailgroup.com https://www.youtube.com/@americanrailroadingpodcast https://www.buymeacoffee.com/dwalshX https://www.aldonco.comhttps://www.enviroserve.com https://www.PHMSA.DOT.govhttps://www.FederalRegister.gov

Dr. Charmain Jackman, Licensed Psychologist and Founder and CEO of InnoPsych, tells us how InnoPsych plans to diversify the psychology workforce; Tami Thompson, Regulatory Affairs Manager at the Washington State Department of Health, discusses how Washington is prioritizing health equity in their rulemaking processes; the Public Health Infrastructure Grant has its own newsletter; and ASTHO is hiring several positions. CNN News Article: Why Black women are pushing to diversify health care industry ASTHO Report: Equitable Rulemaking in Washington State PHIG Newsletter ASTHO Web Page: Careers At ASTHO  

Dr. Steven Stack, Commissioner of the Kentucky Department for Public Health and ASTHO's Immediate Past President, tells us how his state is using the Public Health Infrastructure Grant to improve the state of public health in Kentucky; ASTHO and the National Community Action Partnership are hosting a webinar focused on lessons learned from the vaccine equity project on November 20th at 2 p.m. ET; and California has confirmed the first known case of Clade I MPox in the United States. PHIG Web Page ASTHO Webinar: Leading the Way for Community-Driven Health Transformation – Lessons Learned from the Vaccine Equity Project California Department of Public Health News Release: California Reports First Known U.S. Case of Emerging Mpox Strain CDC News Release: California confirms first clade I mpox case  

EELP Senior Staff Attorney Hannah Perls speaks with Olatunde Johnson, the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. Professor Johnson and Hannah discuss the history and evolution of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, a crucial legal tool for the environmental justice movement. Earlier this year, a federal judge blocked EPA and the Department of Justice from enforcing their Title VI rules prohibiting actions that disparately impact communities of color in the state of Louisiana, and now those rules are at risk of being struck down nationwide.   This is the first episode in a 2-part series on Title VI. Transcript at https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/CleanLaw_EP98.pdf Links mentioned in show: Louisiana v EPA - https://earthjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024.08.22-cain-judgement.pdf Our podcast on the "Quagmire Quartet" Suite of Supreme Court Decisions Undermine Administrative Law -https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/cleanlaw-suite-of-supreme-court-decisions-undermine-administrative-law/ Petition for Rulemaking on Title VI from Republican-led Attorneys General - https://www.myfloridalegal.com/sites/default/files/2024-04/epa-title-vi-comment-final.pdf Response to Petition for Rulemaking from Environmental Justice and Civil Rights Groups - https://www.nclc.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/2024.09.04_Letter_Title-VI-Response-cover-letter-executive-summary-response-letter.pdf Democratic AGs' Response to the Petition for Rulemaking - https://stateimpactcenter.org/files/AG_Actions_NY_Response_FL_Rulemaking_Petition_9.5.24.pdf Olatunde C. Johnson, Lawyering That Has No Name: Title VI and the Meaning of Private Enforcement, 66 Stan. L. Rev. 1293 (2014). - https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1094/

We're back with a deeper dive into the 2024 Data Security Incident Response Report, which features insights and metrics from 1,150+ incidents in 2023.This episode dives deeper into the recent FTC privacy developments and what to look for in the future.Questions & Comments: dkaufman@bakerlaw.com and jlmitchell@bakerlaw.com

A panel of experts will engage in a legal discussion about the implications of using AI in rulemaking, as AI technologies inadvertently influence the process of creating and implementing regulations. The panel will also consider how rulemaking and AI influence the legal and political realms.Featuring: Speakers: Catherine Sharkey, Segal Family Professor of Regulatory Law and Policy, New York University School of LawJohn Nay, Founder & CEO, Norm AiJ. Kennerly Davis, Former Senior Attorney, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP(Moderator) Daniel Flores, Senior Counsel, Committee on Oversight and Accountability, U.S. House of Representatives

Paul Grewal (Coinbase) takes us on a deep dive into all aspects of crypto regulation, litigation, and legislation. A crossover episode with the Washington Legal Foundation / TechFreedom Tech in the Courts series.Topics include:The elevator pitch for cryptoSecurities law: it's not the New Deal anymoreThe inconsistent SECSEC v. Coinbase / Coinbase v. SECOperation Choke Point 2.0The need for crypto legislationCentral bank digital currencies (are dumb)Satoshi Nakamoto: a $68 billion mysteryLinks:Keep Crypto FreeCoinbase's Petition for Rulemaking to the SECOperation Choke Point 2.0 Is Underway, and Crypto Is in Its CrosshairsTech Policy Podcast 312: Web3

Dr. Lisa Richardson, Division Director of Cancer Prevention and Control at the CDC, breaks down a recent ASTHO report on cancer messaging; Andy Baker-White, ASTHO Senior Director for State Health Policy, tells us about two ASTHO webinars focused on public health agency rulemaking; and Dr. Umair Shah, Secretary of Health for the Washington State Department of Health and an ASTHO Member, was recently featured on an episode of the podcast “Reimagining Government for the Digital Age”. ASTHO Report: Improving Public Health Messaging: Exploring the Reach and Effectiveness of Cancer Prevention Communications ASTHO Webinar: Navigating the Rulemaking Process Podcast Episode: Reimagining Public Healthcare with globally renowned innovator, Dr. Umair A. Shah, M.D., MPH  

To address the increasingly hot temperatures nationwide, OSHA has moved closer to a final rule for workplace heat injury and illness prevention by issuing its Notice of Rulemaking in the Federal Register.  Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Background 01:49 Status of the Proposed Rule 03:09 State Plan Standards 04:32 OSHA's National Emphasis Program 08:19 Triggers and Requirements 10:14 Training and Written Program 16:36 Impact on Different Industries 18:01 Preparing for OSHA Inspections and Complaints

In this episode of the Pipeliners Podcast, regular guest Keith Coyle of Babst Calland discusses the recent GPAC meeting focusing on regulatory rulemaking for the LDAR (Leak Detection and Repair) rule.  The episode covers the structure and purpose of the GPAC, previous meetings' outcomes, key topics discussed such as gas gathering lines, large volume release reporting, LNG facilities, hydrogen pipelines, and compliance deadlines.  Keith also recounts discussions and voting outcomes on each topic, providing insights into the regulatory process and its implications for industry compliance. Visit PipelinePodcastNetwork.com for a full episode transcript, as well as detailed show notes with relevant links and insider term definitions. 

On January 18, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce. These cases will determine whether Chevron v. NRDC, a 1984 case in which the Court held that courts should defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes, should be overturned.This program will discuss the […]

The Supreme Court is hearing two cases that deal with a foundational part of administrative law, known as the Chevron deference, which gives federal agencies broad powers to create policies and regulations. We’ll explain the fight over the Chevron deference and how the economy could be impacted if it were overturned. And, what do we lose when we don’t get to see candidates debate each other? Plus, don’t talk to me about this year’s presidential election until I’ve had my coffee. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Conservative Justices Appear Skeptical of Agencies’ Regulatory Power” from The New York Times “China's Economic Growth Disappoints, Fueling Stimulus Calls” from Bloomberg “CNN cancels New Hampshire Republican primary debate” from Politico “Rumors Circulating That James Webb Has Discovered Life on Another World” from Futurism “No, the James Webb Space Telescope hasn't found life out there—at least not yet” from Ars Technica “Trump Back in White House? Lagarde Says ‘Let Me Have Some Coffee'” from Bloomberg We love to hear from you. Send your questions and comments to makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

The Supreme Court is hearing two cases that deal with a foundational part of administrative law, known as the Chevron deference, which gives federal agencies broad powers to create policies and regulations. We’ll explain the fight over the Chevron deference and how the economy could be impacted if it were overturned. And, what do we lose when we don’t get to see candidates debate each other? Plus, don’t talk to me about this year’s presidential election until I’ve had my coffee. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Conservative Justices Appear Skeptical of Agencies’ Regulatory Power” from The New York Times “China's Economic Growth Disappoints, Fueling Stimulus Calls” from Bloomberg “CNN cancels New Hampshire Republican primary debate” from Politico “Rumors Circulating That James Webb Has Discovered Life on Another World” from Futurism “No, the James Webb Space Telescope hasn't found life out there—at least not yet” from Ars Technica “Trump Back in White House? Lagarde Says ‘Let Me Have Some Coffee'” from Bloomberg We love to hear from you. Send your questions and comments to makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

The Supreme Court is hearing two cases that deal with a foundational part of administrative law, known as the Chevron deference, which gives federal agencies broad powers to create policies and regulations. We’ll explain the fight over the Chevron deference and how the economy could be impacted if it were overturned. And, what do we lose when we don’t get to see candidates debate each other? Plus, don’t talk to me about this year’s presidential election until I’ve had my coffee. Here’s everything we talked about today: “Conservative Justices Appear Skeptical of Agencies’ Regulatory Power” from The New York Times “China's Economic Growth Disappoints, Fueling Stimulus Calls” from Bloomberg “CNN cancels New Hampshire Republican primary debate” from Politico “Rumors Circulating That James Webb Has Discovered Life on Another World” from Futurism “No, the James Webb Space Telescope hasn't found life out there—at least not yet” from Ars Technica “Trump Back in White House? Lagarde Says ‘Let Me Have Some Coffee'” from Bloomberg We love to hear from you. Send your questions and comments to makemesmart@marketplace.org or leave us a voicemail at 508-U-B-SMART.

At the core of the regulatory state is the notice and comment process. Agencies propose what they're going to do, the public gets to comment, and agencies have to respond to those comments. It's an imperfect system, to be sure, but it's fundamental to making sure that agencies act with good information and with democratic legitimacy.So what happens when those comments start being made not by people, but by ChatGPT or other large language models? Or how about when agencies themselves use these AI tools to analyze the comments they receive, or even perhaps to write the regulations themselves?To talk through these issues, Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling and Mark Febrizio, both of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center. They spoke about their recent Brooking Institution report on the issue and how they think the regulatory state should deal with generative AI.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.