36. Darrell M. West, “Global Perspectives on E-Government,” in Governance and Information Technology: From Electronic Government to Information Government, edited by Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and David Lazer (MIT Press, 2007), p. 19.
37. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (P. L. 110314) provides for the creation of a public database.
38. Jerry Brito, “Hack, Mash, Peer: Crowdsourcing Government Transparency,” Columbia Science and Technology Law Review 9 (2008): 119–122.
39. В докладе Университета Мичигана утверждается, что администрация следующего президента должна подтвердить свою приверженность расширению доступности правительственной информации услуг в Интернете. См.: National Quality Research Center, American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI). Согласно заключению центра от 28 октября 2008 г., E-Gov Satisfaction Index показывает высокую удовлетворенность граждан работой электронного правительства.
40. См.: www.public.resource.org/index.html(October 2008).
41. Carl Malamud, “The Importance of Being Edgar” (mundi.net/cartography/EDGAR/index.html [December 2008]).
42. James Grimmelmann, “Copyright, Technology, and Access to the Law: An Opinionated Primer,” June 17, 2008 (james.grimmelmann.net/essays/CopyrightTechnologyAccess [December 2008]).
43. Данные должны быть полными, предварительными, своевременно полученными, ясными, доступными для машинной обработки, недискриминационными, не связанными с правами собственности и нелицензированными. См.: “Got Data?” (wiki.opengovdata.org/index.php/OpenDataPrinciples [October 2008]).
44. David Robinson and others, “Government Data and the Invisible Hand,” Yale Journal of Law and Technology 11 (Fall 2008) (papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. cfm?abstract_id=1138083 [October 2008]).
45. Web Content Managers Advisory Council, “Requirements Checklist for Government Web Managers” ( www.usa.gov/webcontent/reqs_bestpractices/reqs_checklist.shtml[October 2008]).
46. См.: W. David Stephenson, “Automated Data Feeds Make Smart Regulation Possible Now” ( www.huffingtonpost.com/w-david-stephenson/automateddata-feeds-make_b_128208.html[October 2008]).
47. Curtis W. Copeland, “Electronic Rulemaking in the Federal Government,” Congressional Research Service Report RL3421018, October 16, 2007 ( www.opencrs.com/document/RL34210[October 2008]).
48. См.: Darlene Meskell, “New Opportunities for Involving Citizens in the Democratic Process,” GSA no. 20 (Fall 2007): 2–4. См. также: Stephen Frantzich and John Sullivan, The C-Span Revolution (University of Oklahoma Press, 1996).
49. EPA Geospatial Data Access Project ( www.epa.gov/enviro/geo_data.html[October 2008]).
50. National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership (www2.urban.org/nnip [October 2008]).
51. Cindy Skrzycki, “1,700 Pages of Rules, Fewer Dead Trees,” Washington Post, December 18, 2007, p. D3.
52. OMB Watch, “21st Century Right to Know,” p. 10.
53. См.: www.pugetsound.epageo.org/(October 2008).
1. См.: Sam Peltzman, Political Participation and Government Regulation (University of Chicago Press, 1998); H. Margaret Conway, Political Participation in the United States (Washington: CQ Press, 2000).
2. James O. Freedman, “Crisis and Legitimacy in the Administrative Process,” Stanford Law Review 27 (April 1975): 1056.
3. Gerald Frug, “The Ideology of Bureaucracy in American Law,” Harvard Law Review 97 (April 1984): 1333.
4. Administrative Procedure Act, ch. 324, 60 Stat. 237 (1946) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 5 U. S. C.).
5. Beth Simone Noveck, “The Electronic Revolution in Rulemaking,” Emory Law Journal 53 (2004): 455, n. 98.
6. Cornelius M. Kerwin, Rulemaking: How Government Agencies Write Law and Make Policy (Washington: CQ Press, 1994), p. 116.
7. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U. S. C. sec. 553 (c).
8. Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816, in Classics of American Political and Constitutional Thought, edited by Scott J. Hammond, Kevin R. Hardwick, and Howard L. Lubert (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2007), p. 745.
9. Cary Coglianese, “The Internet and Citizen Participation in Rulemaking,” Working Paper RWP 04–044 (Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government, 2004), p. 7.
10. Marissa Martino Golden, “Interest Groups in the Rule-Making Process: Who Participates? Whose Voices Get Heard?” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 8 (1998): 250–264.
11. Peter L. Strauss, “ABA Ad Law Section’s E-Rulemaking Survey,” Administrative and Regulatory Law News 29, no. 3 (Spring 2004): 8.
12. Environmental Protection Agency, “Controlling Power Plant Emissions: Public Comments” ( www.epa.gov/mercury/control_emissions/comment.htm[October 2008]).
13. Cameron Scott, “9 Seconds,” SFGate.com, October 23, 2008 ( www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=49&entry_id=31846).
14. Federal Advisory Committee Act, P. L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770 (1972) (codified at 5 U. S. C. App. 2).
15. Negotiated Rulemaking Act, P. L. 101–648, 104 Stat. 4976 (1990) (codified at 5 U. S. C. secs. 561–570); см. также: Phillip J. Harter, “Assessing the Assessors: The Actual Performance of Negotiated Rulemaking,” New York University Environmental Law Journal 9 (2000): 32–56.
16. «[Затем] агентство принимает решение о формировании комитета по соглашению норм, агентство публикует в Federal Register и при необходимости в торговых или других специализированных изданиях замечания, включающие… список лиц, отстаивающих эти интересы, и лицо (или лиц), представляющее агентство». 5 U. S. C. sec. 564 (a) (4) (1990).
17. National Research Council, “Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making” (Washington: 2008), pp. 3–9.
18. Cary Coglianese, “Assessing the Advocacy of Negotiated Rulemaking: A Response to Philip Harter,” New York University Environmental Law Journal 9 (2001): 386–447.
19. Christopher Mooney, The Republican War on Science (New York: Basic Books, 2006).
20. Thomas McGarity and Wendy Wagner, Bending Science: How Special Interests Corrupt Public Health Research (Harvard University Press, 2008).
21. J. B. Ruhl and James Salzman, “In Defense of Regulatory Peer Review,” Washington University Law Review 84 (2006): 1–61.
22. Ibid., p. 25.
23. Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident (Rogers Commission), Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident (Washington: GPO, 1986), appendix F.
24. Sheila Jasanoff, The Fifth Branch: Science Advisors as Policy Makers (Harvard University Press, 1990), p. 61; см. также: Joshua B. Bolten, “Issuance of OMB’s ‘Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review,’” Memorandum M-05–03, Office of Management and Budget, December 16, 2004.
25. Government Accountability Office, “Federal Research: Peer Review Practices at Service Agencies Vary,” GAO/RCED-99–99 (1999).
26. См., например, следующие публикации: “Peer Review: EPA Needs Implementation Procedures and Additional Controls,” GAO/IRCED-94–98 (1994); “Peer Review: Reforms Needed to Ensure Fairness in Federal Agency Grant Selection,” GAO/PEMD-94–1 (1994); “Peer Review: Compliance with the Privacy Act and Federal Advisory Committee Act,” GAO/GGD-94–48 (1991); “Federal Advisory Committees: GSA’s Management Oversight and GAO Comments on Proposed Legislative Amendments,” GAO/T-GGD-89–1 (1998); “Federal Advisory Committee Act: General Services Administration’s Management of Advisory Committee Activities,” GAO/GGD 89–10 (1988); “University Funding: Information on the Role of Peer Review at NSF and NIH,” GAO/WED-87-87FS (1987). См. также: Lars Noah, “Scientific ‘Republicanism’: Expert Peer Review and the Quest for Regulatory Deliberation,” Emory Law Journal 49 (2000): 1034–1083.
Читать дальше
Конец ознакомительного отрывка
Купить книгу