Abstract
This article addresses the potentially conflicting roles played by the Office of Management and Budget in overseeing agencies' rulemaking: analyzing rules using cost-benefit analysis and exercising executive control of rulemaking. The author argues that the Office of lnformation and Regulatory Affair's role as the eyes and ears of the president in overseeing regulatory agencies has led to its analytical mission playing a secondary role and is, in part, responsible for the lack of visible effects (positive or negative) of cost-benefit analysis. By using a simple model, the article demonstrates how executive review and analytical requirements interact in presidential decisionmaking.