The US Department of Health and Human Services has recently made a significant decision to reverse the long-standing Richardson Waiver requirement. This requirement, in place since 1971, mandated a period of notice and an opportunity for public comment on various decisions related to agency management, personnel, public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts.
The Richardson Waiver went beyond the standard notice-and-comment periods outlined in the Administrative Procedures Act, emphasizing that decisions without public notice should be made sparingly. However, incoming HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. expressed concerns about the costs and operational inefficiencies associated with the waiver.
In a notice posted to the Federal Register, Kennedy highlighted that the waiver's requirements imposed unnecessary burdens on the Department and the public, hindering the Department's ability to adapt quickly to legal and policy mandates. This move has sparked concerns among open government advocates and policy experts who fear that it may lead to increased secrecy surrounding the Department's decisions.
During his Senate confirmation hearings, Kennedy emphasized his commitment to 'radical transparency' during his tenure at HHS. Critics of the decision argue that eliminating notice and comment for certain actions could limit public participation and overlook the input of key stakeholders such as researchers and health advocates.
Lawrence Gostin, the O'Neill Chair of Global Health Law at Georgetown University, expressed concerns about the potential implications of this decision, stating that it could allow HHS to make crucial public health decisions behind closed doors, without adequate input from relevant parties.
