CEI Supports Sen. Rick Scott and Rep. Byron Donald’s New Regulatory Reform Bill to Prune Unneeded Rules

This news release was originally posted at cei.org.

WASHINGTON – Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) recently introduced S. 2239, the Unnecessary Agency Regulations Act of 2021, a law that would require the Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) to identify new regulations each year that are obsolete, redundant, or burdensome, and to send Congress a list of such rules to consolidate or remove. The bill also requires Congress to actually act on those recommendations. The House version, H.R. 4132, was introduced this week by Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL).

CEI senior fellow Ryan Young said:

“As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic, America needs both short-term recovery and long-term resilience. The Unnecessary Agency Regulations Act of 2021 contributes to both. In the short term, a regulatory housecleaning will help new businesses start up more smoothly, and help existing businesses hire employees and grow again. In the long run, regular pruning of redundant, obsolete, and burdensome rules will help keep agencies and businesses resilient against the next crisis.

“Trillions of dollars of politically motivated infrastructure and stimulus spending will not help the COVID recovery. It will simply take money away from some projects and put it into other projects instead. A deregulatory stimulus, of which this bill should be a part, would make it easier for people to create new opportunities and new wealth, without adding to the deficit.”

CEI Vice President for Policy Wayne Crews said:

“As a hidden tax that rivals the explicit one we deal with every April 15, the burdens of federal regulation require far greater disclosure than is currently required and a mechanism to slow down the constant flow of new rules.  Some 3,000 rules and regulations appear annually in the Federal Register, and, minus aberrations like former president Donald Trump’s one-in, two-out campaign, little or no rollback happens. One gauge of regulation we get, OMB’s Report to Congress on Regulatory Costs and Benefits, is chronically months or years late and hopelessly incomplete when it does show up. Another disclosure tool, the twice-yearly Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, ostensibly presents agency regulatory priorities but is non-binding. While administrative state supporters will inevitably fret that OMB lacks the necessary staff to identify redundant, burdensome and obsolete rules – let alone make recommendations regarding them in the Agenda. The Unnecessary Agency Regulations Act from Sen. Rick Scott points out what must be done in tomorrow’s amplified regulatory disclosure. If OMB cannot be allowed to suffer, neither can an over-regulated public. The solution is to reduce regulation, not ignore its volume as it flies by.”

More CEI resources on regulatory reform:

Inside Sources op-ed: How to Stimulate the Economy without Trillions in New Spending

CEI Study: How to Make Sure Reformed #NeverNeeded Regulations Stay That Way: Reform the Rulemaking Process, Not Just the Rules

CEI’s Agenda for Congress: Regulatory Reform

Ten Thousand Commandments: An Annual Snapshot of the Federal Regulatory State

The 2021 Edition of Ten Thousand Commandments Is Out Now

How much does regulation cost? It’s hard to tell, due to a lack of transparency. The government is legally required to tell the public how much it spends ($6.55 trillion in 2020), and how big the national debt is ($28 trillion as of June 2020). But regulatory agencies are reluctant to share their cost information—when they bother to calculate it at all. That’s why Wayne Crews puts together his Ten Thousand Commandments report every year. If agencies won’t make their basic information public, somebody should.

Wayne estimates, based on the incomplete information that agencies do disclose, that federal regulations cost about $1.9 trillion per year, or about $14,368 per household. That is more than households spend on food, clothing, health care, or any other expense except for housing (which is itself artificially expensive due to zoning and land-use regulations, steel and lumber tariffs, and financial regulations that make lending and mortgages more expensive).

Put another way, if the federal regulatory state were its own country, it would have the world’s eighth largest GDP, behind Italy and ahead of Brazil.

It is worth emphasizing that $1.9 trillion per year is just an approximation, based on the limited information agencies make available. Other studies give even higher estimates. It is also possible the real number is lower, but the fact that agencies have not offered credible estimates, even though these would make them look good, makes this unlikely.

This year’s Ten Thousand Commandments also contains a wrap-up of the Trump administration’s impact on regulatory costs. The picture is mixed.

On the plus side, Executive Order 13771 cleaned out hundreds of old rules from the books by requiring agencies to remove two old regulations for each new one it issued. Though this one-in, two-out policy had diminishing returns as the low-hanging fruit was mostly picked after the first two years, it was still a success. The order’s additional requirement that agencies impose zero net new regulatory costs served as a soft regulatory budget, putting a cap on the burdens that agencies could impose.

New regulations under Trump reached their lowest levels since recordkeeping began in the 1970s. In 2019, the number of new rules went below 3,000 for the first time ever—despite the fact that getting rid of old rules requires publishing new rules to formalize the changes. Federal Register page counts also went down sharply, though Trump’s final edition ended up as the second highest in the Register’s 85-year history, exceeded only by Barack Obama’s final year.

On the downside, Trump increased regulation in several policy areas. His administration doubled tariffs and added other trade restrictions affecting hundreds of trillions of dollars of goods, further restricted immigration, filed the two largest antitrust lawsuits since the 1990s, made frequent threats to regulate or punish media companies, and showed little concern for separation of powers and other checks on executive power.

From the perspective of institutional design, the administration made a strategic error that let most of his reforms be reversed when he left office. Most of Trump’s positive regulatory reforms came through executive orders, which can be repealed by the next president. Permanent reform requires congressional legislation. Although Trump’s party held a majority in both congressional chambers for his first two years, he did not work with them to codify regulatory reforms.

For example, while Rep. Bob Good (R-VA) introduced the Guidance Out Of Darkness (GOOD) Act to enact permanent guidance document reform similar to the ones in Trump’s Executive Order 13891, the administration’s priorities were elsewhere. President Biden was able to undo them, and most of Trump’s other regulatory reforms, on his first day in office.

Guidance documents exist to clarify definitions and ambiguities in regulations. Courts routinely defer to them in cases, meaning that guidance documents often have the force of law, despite rarely going through the proper rulemaking process. Guidance documents are part of the larger problem of “regulatory dark matter,” which describes the phenomenon of agencies issuing new regulations through guidance documents, notices, press releases, and even blog posts without proper transparency and accountability.

EO 13891 was one of the first attempts to rein in dark matter rulemaking. It required agencies to publish all of their guidance documents in a single, searchable online portal accessible to the public. Guidance documents not published in the portal would no longer have any effect. The GOOD Act would have made this policy permanent.

Other reforms met a similar fate, such as the REINS Act to require congressional votes on major new regulations, and the Pandemic Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Act), which would have created an independent commission to put together a package of rules for Congress to repeal that are harming the COVID response and economic recovery.

It is important that the next reform-minded president learns from Trump’s mistake and involves Congress in reform efforts. Executive orders are better than nothing, but they are not enough.

For more on how big the regulatory state has grown, and for ideas to reform it, read the 2021 edition of Ten Thousand Commandments.

This Week in Ridiculous Regulations

Negotiators reached a deal on a bipartisan infrastructure bill, at least for now. There were also marathon committee markup sessions for five antitrust bills. Meanwhile, agencies issued new rules ranging from bean insurance to frozen mangos.

On to the data:

  • Agencies issued 82 final regulations last week, after 53 the previous week.
  • That’s the equivalent of a new regulation every two hours and three minutes.
  • With 1,536 final regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 3,200 final regulations this year. 2020’s total was 3,149 final regulations.
  • Agencies issued 41 proposed regulations in the Federal Register last week, after 24 the previous week.
  • With 1,006 proposed regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 2,096 proposed regulations this year. 2020’s total was 2,021 proposed regulations.
  • Agencies published 437 notices last week, after 413 notices the previous week.
  • With 10,574 notices so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 22,029 notices this year. 2020’s total was 22,480.
  • Last week, 1,489 new pages were added to the Federal Register, after 931 pages the previous week.
  • The average Federal Register issue this year contains 282 pages.
  • With 33,851 pages so far, the 2021 Federal Register is on pace for 70,523 pages in 2021. The 2020 total was 87,352 pages. The all-time record adjusted page count (subtracting skips, jumps, and blank pages) is 96,994, set in 2016.
  • Rules are called “economically significant” if they have costs of $100 million or more in a given year. There are two such rules so far in 2021, none from the last week. Agencies published five economically significant rules in 2020 and four in 2019.
  • The running cost tally for 2021’s economically significant rules ranges from net savings of $100.7 million to net costs of $362.5 million. The 2020 figure ranges from net savings of between $2.04 billion and $5.69 billion, mostly from estimated savings on federal spending. The exact numbers depend on discount rates and other assumptions.
  • Agencies have published 21 final rules meeting the broader definition of “significant” in 2021, with two in the last week. This is on pace for 44 significant rules in 2021. 2020’s total was 79 significant final rules.
  • In 2021, 318 new rules affect small businesses. Seven are classified as significant. 2020’s totals were 668 rules affecting small businesses, 26 of them significant.

Highlights from last week’s new regulations:

The new For more data, see Ten Thousand Commandments and follow @10KC and @RegoftheDay on Twitter.

This Week in Ridiculous Regulations

Members of Congress introduced five antitrust bills last week. Antitrust activist Lina Khan was confirmed to a seat on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and in a surprise move, was immediately afterward made FTC chair. There was no Federal Register on Friday in observance of Juneteenth. Meanwhile, agencies issued new rules ranging from chinch weed to educational loans.

On to the data:

  • Agencies issued 53 final regulations last week, after 65 the previous week.
  • That’s the equivalent of a new regulation every three hours and 10 minutes.
  • With 1,454 final regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 3,161 final regulations this year. 2020’s total was 3,149 final regulations.
  • Agencies issued 24 proposed regulations in the Federal Register last week, after 27 the previous week.
  • With 965 proposed regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 2,098 proposed regulations this year. 2020’s total was 2,021 proposed regulations.
  • Agencies published 413 notices last week, after 328 notices the previous week.
  • With 10,137 notices so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 22,037 notices this year. 2020’s total was 22,480.
  • Last week, 931 new pages were added to the Federal Register, after 1,050 pages the previous week.
  • The average Federal Register issue this year contains 281 pages.
  • With 32,360 pages so far, the 2021 Federal Register is on pace for 70,348 pages in 2021. The 2020 total was 87,352 pages. The all-time record adjusted page count (subtracting skips, jumps, and blank pages) is 96,994, set in 2016.
  • Rules are called “economically significant” if they have costs of $100 million or more in a given year. There are two such rules so far in 2021, none from the last week. Agencies published five economically significant rules in 2020, and four in 2019.
  • The running cost tally for 2021’s economically significant rules ranges from net savings of $100.7 million to net costs of $362.5 million. The 2020 figure ranges from net savings of between $2.04 billion and $5.69 billion, mostly from estimated savings on federal spending. The exact numbers depend on discount rates and other assumptions.
  • Agencies have published 20 final rules meeting the broader definition of “significant” in 2021, with two in the last week. This is on pace for 43 significant rules in 2021. 2020’s total was 79 significant final rules.
  • In 2021, 301 new rules affect small businesses. Seven are classified as significant. 2020’s totals were 668 rules affecting small businesses, 26 of them significant.

Highlights from last week’s new regulations:

For more data, see Ten Thousand Commandments and follow @10KC and @RegoftheDay on Twitter.

A Better Approach to Tariff Diplomacy

In diplomacy, carrots tend to be more effective than sticks. Yet, two consecutive administrations have used tariff threats to try to achieve their objectives. Former President Trump did four rounds of back-and-forth tariffs against China, and President Biden is trying it now to counter proposed digital taxes from six mostly European countries. The strategy has yet to work. Over at National Review, I take a look at a better way: Rather than threaten new tariffs, promise to remove old ones as a sweetener.

Why not scrap Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs in exchange for scrapping proposed digital taxes? Carrots are often more effective than sticks.

The metal tariffs will also likely be an issue at this week’s United States–European Union summit. European leaders want a December 1 deadline for ending them. In return, they would end the retaliatory tariffs they immposed in response. A digital tax moratorium should also be part of the deal.

Here at home, the metal tariffs are slowing the COVID recovery by raising auto and housing prices, which were already at record highs. They are also causing needless diplomatic frictions with allies. Removing them is a win-win.

Even if the diplomatic goal fails—there are no guarantees in foreign policy—the lower tariff would still help the U.S. economy. Read the whole thing here.

Boeing-Airbus Dispute Remains Unsolved: Tariffs Gone, Subsidies Stay

The European Union and the United States eagerly announced today that they had resolved their 17-year dispute over aerospace subsidies. They exaggerate their claims. It is good news that both sides are standing down on tariffs for at least five years. But the reason for the dispute in the first place was over subsidies to Boeing and Airbus. Those will remain in place.

The tariffs that each side levied on the other had the explicit goal of stopping the subsidies. The World Trade Organization even allowed tariffs on each side to go through, on the theory that these wrongs were intended to make a right. But as usually happens with tariff-based diplomacy, it didn’t work. As a result, industries from cheese and wine to motorcycles had to deal with tariffs for years over a dispute they had nothing to do with. And now that the tariffs are going away, they didn’t accomplish their actual goal.

Why are the U.S. and EU suddenly OK with each other’s aerospace subsidies? China. China’s aerospace sector is heavily subsidized. Both Europe and the U.S. feel it is better to work together to counter China than to squabble with each other.

Their fears may be exaggerated, though. Industries that rely on subsidies and are essentially government enterprises tend not to be very competitive in the long run. Yes, China’s aerospace market share is increasing, but subsidized and protected industries grow soft. Their corporate cultures are closer to the Post Office than to Silicon Valley startups. So are their rates of innovation.

Still, for the sake of argument, assume that China’s model of government subsidies and control does work in the long run, and Boeing and Airbus become also-rans. Relatively poor Chinese taxpayers would essentially foot the bill for relatively wealthy American and European airlines and travelers. This is income redistribution in reverse. Even this unlikely best-case scenario is unwise policy from China’s perspective.

Most of the 20th century’s economic history showed that state planning doesn’t work. Even if Boeing, Airbus, and their captured politicians think the short term looks scary, there is no reason for this current instance of state capitalism to be any different in the long run.

This week’s decision to remove the Boeing-Airbus dispute tariffs was a wise one. But if the goal is to make the aerospace industry more competitive, President Biden and European leaders did not do that. They need to end subsidies that make companies soft and dependent. The best way to counter China’s state-run enterprises is not with our version of the same thing. It is with actual enterprises.

Some of my earlier commentary on the Boeing-Airbus dispute is here. My papers on the Export-Import Bank, whose billions of dollars in annual assistance to Boeing played a starring role in the dispute, are here and here.

This Week in Ridiculous Regulations

The economic recovery continues, but Congress is still intent on passing unneeded stimulus and infrastructure spending. Inflation is also up, and five antitrust bills are being introduced. Meanwhile, agencies issued new rules ranging from madtoms to low-fat yogurt.

On to the data:

  • Agencies issued 65 final regulations last week, after 54 the previous week.
  • That’s the equivalent of a new regulation every two hours and 35 minutes.
  • With 1,401 final regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 3,155 final regulations this year. 2020’s total was 3,149 final regulations.
  • Agencies issued 27 proposed regulations in the Federal Register last week, after 32 the previous week.
  • With 931 proposed regulations so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 2,119 proposed regulations this year. 2020’s total was 2,021 proposed regulations.
  • Agencies published 328 notices last week, after 299 notices the previous week.
  • With 9,724 notices so far in 2021, agencies are on pace to issue 21,901 notices this year. 2020’s total was 22,480.
  • Last week, 1,050 new pages were added to the Federal Register, after 956 pages the previous week.
  • The average Federal Register issue this year contains 284 pages.
  • With 31,426 pages so far, the 2021 Federal Register is on pace for 70,779 pages in 2021. The 2020 total was 87,352 pages. The all-time record adjusted page count (subtracting skips, jumps, and blank pages) is 96,994, set in 2016.
  • Rules are called “economically significant” if they have costs of $100 million or more in a given year. There are two such rules so far in 2021, none from the last week. Agencies published five economically significant rules in 2020, and four in 2019.
  • The running cost tally for 2021’s economically significant rules ranges from net savings of $100.7 million to net costs of $362.5 million. The 2020 figure ranges from net savings of between $2.04 billion and $5.69 billion, mostly from estimated savings on federal spending. The exact numbers depend on discount rates and other assumptions.
  • Agencies have published 19 final rules meeting the broader definition of “significant” in 2021, with two in the last week. This is on pace for 40 significant rules in 2021. 2020’s total was 79 significant final rules.
  • In 2021, 293 new rules affect small businesses. Six are classified as significant. 2020’s totals were 668 rules affecting small businesses, 26 of them significant.

Highlights from last week’s new regulations:

For more data, see Ten Thousand Commandments and follow @10KC and @RegoftheDay on Twitter.

Different Attitudes Towards Life

In today’s polarized discourse, there is a stark difference between thinkers who spend most of their time being for something, and those who spend most of their time being against something. One attitude is healthier than the other, and is more likely to lead towards truth, and is likelier to succeed in persuading others and getting its policies enacted.

Think of it as the difference between between favoring liberalism, openness, and dynamism on one hand; and owning the libs or the cons, depending on one’s tribal affiliation, on the other.

Which makes this passage from near the end of Evelyn Waugh’s 1943 novel Brideshead Revisited especially poignant (p. 383 of the Back Bay Books edition):

I said to the doctor, who was with us daily: “He’s got a wonderful will to live, hasn’t he?”

“Would you put it like that? I should say a great fear of death.”

“Is there a difference?”

“Oh dear, yes. He doesn’t derive any strength from his fear, you know. It’s wearing him out.”

CPI Inflation Indicator Hits 5 Percent: Not Stagflation, But a Useful Warning

The Consumer Price Index (CPI) for May came out this morning. At 5 percent, it was higher than expected. CPI has its flaws as an indicator, but the fact that it is now the highest it has been since the 2008 financial crisis still says something useful. We’re not going back to 1970s stagflation, so nobody needs to freak out, but today’s numbers are a warning. Policy makers should listen.

Trillions of dollars of proposed new deficit spending would further increase inflation, and would mostly stimulate the politically connected. The Federal Reserve should resist political pressure to further flood the money supply in hopes of stimulating a faster COVID recovery.

The timing is also off. Most projects would not kick in until the economy is already mostly recovered anyway. While there is still a way to go, unemployment is already below 6 percent, GDP is working its way back to trend, and the return of in-person schooling this fall will allow more parents to reenter the workforce. Continued progress depends on vaccination rates, not new political projects.

Rather than producing more cash, Congress should enable more production of actual goods and services with a deregulatory stimulus, lowering of trade barriers, and incentives for more vaccinations. Almost a third of occupations now require some sort of license. These keep thousands of would-be small entrepreneurs out of the market, and make it harder for workers to find or change jobs. Financial regulations make it hard for startups and struggling businesses to find capital to grow or stay open—and higher inflation would worsen the problem. Endless permits and years-long environmental reviews are blocking infrastructure projects that could already be underway.

Tariffs left over from the Trump administration, along with new ones the Biden administration is proposing, are making cars and houses more expensive at a lousy time, and could hit billions of dollars of other goods this holiday shopping season.

Vaccination rates are the single most important factor for reopening the economy. People are itching to get back to normal, but first they need to feel safe. Remember, people didn’t wait for governors’ orders to lock down in the first place. Opening back up is also a decision people are making for themselves. Lifting government restrictions might have some impact at the margin. Politicians are not in the driver’s seat here, but there are still things they can do. Some states have tried incentive programs, like lottery drawings and free goods. These are already having a positive impact in communities, saving lives and letting people open back up. More of these would speed the process more than inflation would.

An inflationary boost is tempting for politicians because it is easy. It takes hard work to make substantive reforms to regulation and trade policy and to reach out to vaccine-hesitant people and ask them to do the right thing. But what is worthwhile is rarely easy. While today’s inflation news is not doom-and-gloom, it is cause for concern. We are at an inflection point. Will Congress and President Biden do the right thing?

For more, see my recent explainer on how inflation works, and my recent op-ed on how to stimulate the economy without new spending.

Stimulating the COVID Recovery without Trillions in Spending

Over at Inside Sources, I make the case that deregulation, freer trade, and continued vaccinations will do more to open up the economy than the trillions of dollars of politicized spending Congress is lining up:

Federal, state, and local regulators eased more than 800 regulations last year that were blocking access to telemedicine, medical supplies, and food and grocery deliveries, along with unneeded occupational licenses that were keeping people out of work. We’ve already seen the benefits. Now policymakers need to continue this important work as entrepreneurs look for ways to adapt to the new normal but find themselves blocked because they don’t have the right permit.

Steel and aluminum tariffs left over from the Trump administration are adding hundreds of dollars to car prices and thousands of dollars to construction costs, at a time when housing prices are becoming unaffordable for many buyers. Congress could get rid of them today if it wanted to. Congress should also stop Biden’s proposed doubling of Canadian lumber tariffs, which would further increase housing prices while alienating an ally with whom we just signed the USMCA trade agreement. He has also proposed an additional $2 billion in tariffs against six mostly allied countries with whom we will be negotiating trade agreements in the near future. These would come into effect in the middle of the holiday shopping season.

My colleague Wayne Crews has a good term for this type of proposal: a deregulatory stimulus. Read the whole thing here.