Old objection, old answer. Time to move on.

“The VP of the American Physical Society believes that a federal OA mandate -- in this case the Federal Research Public Access Act or FRPAA -- would undermine peer review. Publishers have been raising this objection for so long that I wrote an article-length response five years ago . Excerpt: ‘I'm tired of keying new blog responses to this old canard and don't want to have to do it every time lobbyists repeat it. Writing new rebuttals even to old and unargued objections makes us vulnerable to anyone who wants to yank our chain. It's much better to write a thorough rebuttal once and link to it as needed. It strengthens the response, saves time, and cuts the chain.’ So here we go again. Also see my reference page on FRPAA , which includes a series of reminders about the bill that critics generally fail to mention. Like its predecessors, the current version of the objection dwells on the value of peer review, but offers no argument that we need subscription journals for peer review, and no argument that FRPAA would trigger cancellations of subscription journals. And it fails to mention the provisions of FRPAA specifically designed to answer the objection.”