MGMT 520- Legal, Political, and Ethical Dimensions of Business
Keller Graduate School of Management
May 15, 2014
I choose “Federal Employees Health Benefits Program Coverage for Certain Intermittent Employees”. The Office of Personnel Management controls this proposed regulation. I am pursuing my MBA with a concentration in accounting, but my second choice would have been HealthCare management so by choosing this regulation I will have a better understanding of the type of regulations currently in place or being proposed. At this time the regulation proposed does not have a direct impact on myself, nor the business I am in. I have attached a copy of the ...view middle of the document...
Once I have submitted my comment on the proposed regulation I can challenge the validity after it becomes a law. In this particular case I must comment during November 14, 2012 to January 14, 2012, in order to challenge regulation. The public comment period cannot be less then 30 days and it’s open to private citizens, businesspeople, corporations, government officials and industry representatives.
If the proposal passes I can use five legal theories in an attempt to overturn or declare the regulation invalid in court. One legal theory I can use is the Arbitrary and Capricious, which is an abuse of discretion or is a violation of some other law. The agency must show evidences to support to the proposed rule. If there’s no evidence to support the proposed rule, this where it can be an abuse of discretion or violation.
The second legal theory that can be used to overturn a regulation is by completing a substantial evidence test, which is that a regulation is unsupported by substantial evidence. This theory requires more convincing evidence then proof or basis for the regulation. The third legal theory is that an agency did not obey the APA requirements of notice, publication and public comment/input.
A fourth theory is that a regulation is unconstitutional. The regulations that are challenged through constitutional grounds deal with an agency authority to search records or that impose discriminatory requirements for licensing professionals. The final theory to challenge a regulation is ultra vires, which means beyond its powers. This theory states that the regulation goes beyond the power given to the agency in permitting the act.
If the regulation “Federal Employees Health Benefits Program Coverage for Certain Intermittent Employees” was to pass and I would want it overturned the two best theories to challenge the regulation would the agency did not follow APA requirements and Arbitrary and Capricious. Even though the regulation was proposed last week it could easily be states that the agency did not have enough notices, publications and/or public comment inputs, therefore did not follow the APA requirements. I would also use the theory of substantial evidence test. I the agency should provided further convincing evidence as to why changes should take place on the “Federal Employees Health Benefits Program Coverage for Certain Intermittent Employees”. Even though it uses Hurricane Sandy as substantial evidence, which in this case hits home to many people, I do believe there’s a lack of substantial evidence.
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 14, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27743]
Rules and Regulations
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and...