House Republicans took aim at federal regulations in hearings on Capitol Hill on June 14, praising Trump-era attempts at deregulation and vowing to roll back what they see as excessive regulations imposed by President Joe Biden’s administration.
Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) summarized the GOP position in his opening statement.
“The Department of Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, and several other agencies launched a government-wide effort to push out regulations to fundamentally change American life,” Comer said. “It’s estimated that just three of the Biden administration’s rules will cause $1.5 trillion to be spent over the next decade.”
Comer added that such regulations pit the power of the executive branch against the interests of the American people, producing higher costs for businesses and fewer choices in the marketplace.
Democrats on the House Committee on Oversight and Investigation pushed back on the assertion that federal regulations inhibit economic growth. They pointed out that landmark regulatory actions to protect worker safety and the environment have not only saved lives but contributed to the nation’s thriving economy and low rate of unemployment.
Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said most Americans want regulation that ensures clean air and water, safe workplaces, and a food supply free of contamination. Businesses are motivated by profit, Rankin said, and are therefore focused on reducing costs rather than ensuring the public welfare.
“The key difference between the parties today is the Democrats believe that government regulation must be used to serve the public interest of everyone, the common good of all,” Raskin said. “Republicans want corporate CEOs and industry lobbyists to take over the regulatory process and write the rules that serve their own interests.”
Both parties agreed that the process of making federal regulations could be improved.
The Rule-Making Process
Federal regulations are legally binding rules that govern various aspects of American life and business. The purpose of regulations is to ensure compliance with federal laws, such as the Environmental Protection Act or the Rail Safety Improvement Act.Rather than making specific rules based on such complex pieces of legislation, Congress often delegates rule-making to the executive branch, which is responsible for enforcing the law.
The process of making federal regulations includes just three steps but is deceptively complex, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The process entails several layers of analysis, review, and comment by various federal agencies and the general public.
“The public sees the process of crafting regulations as opaque and inscrutable, and often it is,” said Raskin. He also noted that the process has not been updated in decades, but Biden issued an executive order to modernize the process in April, aimed at making it more transparent and inclusive.
Comer agreed that change is needed. “Fortunately, Republicans in Congress know what a thoughtful, efficient, and results-driven regulatory system looks like,” he said.
“This committee and the House majority will continue to hold the Biden administration accountable for its extreme regulatory overreach and pursue legislative solutions to ensure common-sense regulatory reform.”
Measuring Cost and Benefit
The disagreement between committee Republicans and Democrats centered on the relative value of marketplace versus the federal government in ensuring the health and prosperity of the nation.To Republicans, multiplying regulations increases the paperwork required of business, which increases costs and decreases profitability, innovation, and job creation.
“When America isn’t tied down with red tape or buried under heaps of federal paperwork, American small businesses, workers, and communities are capable of soaring to new heights of prosperity,” Comer said.
“And with more economic prosperity comes more economic opportunities. And these opportunities will do more to help Americans create, innovate, and thrive than any regulation pushed through by unelected bureaucrats.”
Democrats on the committee see regulations in terms of their benefit to society.
“When we get regulation right, we avoid disaster. When we get regulation wrong, we court disaster,” Raskin said. As evidence, he cited a coal dust explosion that killed 29 miners in West Virginia in 2010 after mine safety rules implemented in the 1970s were rolled back, along with other industrial disasters linked to deregulation.
Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) pointed to the train derailment in New Palestine, Ohio, earlier this year that resulted in the release of toxic chemicals and fumes causing the evacuation of residents and ongoing environmental damage.
When deregulation goes too far, “the risk then falls on the public in terms of health, safety, and life and limb. And we’ve seen the consequences,” Connolly said.
Yet adding regulations at home may simply push the health and environmental consequences abroad, according to Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.).
“While the EPA worries about potential problems with salmon in Alaska, unregulated gold mining in the third world poisons 15 million people,” Gosar said.
Reforms in Progress
Biden’s April 6 executive order directs the Office of Management and Budget to revise the federal rule-making process within one year. The revision is aimed at gaining broader public input on proposed rules.In May, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) introduced HR 3230, the Unfunded Mandates Accountability and Transparency Act, to provide for regulatory impact analyses for certain rules.
“This bill would bring real transparency and accountability to the regulatory process by requiring the true cost of new major regulations, including those passed on to state and local governments, to be carefully calculated and considered before implementation,” Foxx said.
“We need to make sure that federal rules and regulations do not unduly burden families and job creators, and slow our economic engine.”
