IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v10y1990i04p449-470_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Consumers Oppose Consumer Protection: The Politics of Regulatory Backlash

Author

Listed:
  • Vogel, David

Abstract

This article examines a neglected phenomenon in the existing literature on social regulation, namely political opposition to regulation that comes not from business but from consumers. It examines four cases of successful grass-roots consumer opposition to government health and safety regulations in the United States. Two involve rules issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a 1974 requirement that all new automobiles be equipped with an engine-interlock system, and a 1967 rule that denied federal highway funds to states that did not require motorcyclists to wear a helmet. In 1977, Congress overturned the Food and Drug Administration's ban on the artificial sweetener, saccharin. Beginning in 1987, the FDA began to yield to pressures from the gay community by agreeing to streamline its procedures for the testing and approval of new drugs designed to fight AIDS and other fatal diseases. The article identifies what these regulations have in common and examines their significance for our understanding the politics of social regulation in the United States and other industrial nations.

Suggested Citation

  • Vogel, David, 1990. "When Consumers Oppose Consumer Protection: The Politics of Regulatory Backlash ," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 449-470, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:10:y:1990:i:04:p:449-470_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X00006085/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Bernauer & Aseem Prakash & Liam F. Beiser‐McGrath, 2020. "Do exemptions undermine environmental policy support? An experimental stress test on the odd‐even road space rationing policy in India," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 481-500, July.
    2. Struenck, Christoph, 2001. "Why is there No Mad Cow Disease in the United States? Comparing the Politics of Food Safety in Europe and the U.S," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt4z6868qv, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    3. Boakye, Derrick & Sarpong, David & Mordi, Chima, 2022. "Regulatory review of new product innovation: Conceptual clarity and future research directions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:10:y:1990:i:04:p:449-470_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.