9 Responses to “Regulating Regulation”

1. #1 |  Kent |  July 17th, 2003 at 3:20 am

   Well, just wanted to let you know that I read your piece at Foxnews.

   I particularly liked your line at the end, “And thatâ??s exactly why it hasnâ??t the slightest chance of passing.”

   But now I am all depressed ;)

2. #2 |  Chip Taylor |  July 17th, 2003 at 5:52 am

   Well, as Holmes said “taxes are the price we pay for civilization.”

   And after all, could we really call it “civilization” if Swiss cheese was allowed to have just any size or shape of holes?

3. #3 |  Chris |  July 17th, 2003 at 8:48 am

   Ive Got a problem.

   After reading your excellent column on Gov Regs, I decided to measure my cheese. It turns out that the swiss cheese I am eating is outside of the normal distribution of proper swiss cheese as per the government regulation detailed in your article.

   Whom am I to call regarding this. I pay my taxes and dammit, I want proper swiss cheese!

4. #4 |  Matt |  July 17th, 2003 at 10:40 am

   Excellent article… one question, how do you pronounce the name of the author of the book you cited?

5. #5 |  Chris Farley |  July 17th, 2003 at 11:15 am

   The Congressional Responsibility Act of 2003, or H.R. 110

   That’s the name of the resolution. Everyone should write to their congressman and ask them to support it.

6. #6 |  JASON D. SMITH |  July 17th, 2003 at 11:24 am

   Great article, very depressing to learn that the free market system is governed by 75,000 laws some as mundane as swiss cheese holes. It is become increasingly clear that our government is getting completely out of control. I think it is time we take Jefferson up on his offer and as a society and revamp the current system.

7. #7 |  Bunnie Foo Foo |  July 17th, 2003 at 12:40 pm

   Radley, I was wondering where you got this statement: The Office of Management and Budget estimates that federal regulations cost businesses between $500 and $600 billion each year.

   Because the most recent OMB estimate (released in their draft report to Congress earlier this year) calculated the costs of regulations to all of society (including busineses) as between $38-44 billion per year. To my knowledge, that figure is the highest they’ve ever admitted to.

   Further, you credit a CATO scholar with coming at the ‘close to $900 billion/year figure’ for cost to small businesses. That was actually the result of a Mercatus or GMU study by Professors Mark Crain and Tom Hopkins — they found the cost to be around $850 billion. Susan Dudley, another Mercatus scholar found the cost of administering regulations at an additional $30 billion or so.

   Just fyi. But please tell me where you got that OMB figure. It’s the first I’ve heard of it.

8. #8 |  FDL |  July 17th, 2003 at 3:36 pm

   Radley, its the “Federal Register” not “Federal Registry”.

   no fact checkers at Fox?

9. #9 |  Sharif |  July 18th, 2003 at 11:02 am

   Mr. Balko,

   Your article regarding federal regulations has a major misstatement in it.

   You wrote: “All of these regulations carry the weight of law, yet none of them are actually voted on by Congress, and a sparse few are ever aired for public debate.”

   The last phrase is highly inaccurate because the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553) has requirements for regulatory rule making which includes public notice of the rule making, as well as the opportunity to comment on the rule making. This is done by publication of proposed regulations in the Federal Register (NOT Federal Registry as you had written in your article: “Those costs include paying lawyers to merely scan the Federal Registry each day to see if the most recently issued rules affect the business they work for.”)

   Once published, proposed regulations have a comment period of 30,60 or 90 days. It is during that time that an entity that will be impacted by the regulation can submit comments to the public docket on the rule making. Comments are not limited to just industry or lobbyists; any member of the general public may submit a comment if they so desire. However, the reality of the situation is that the average citizen does not thumb through the Federal Register on a daily basis. Some of the more controversial proposed regulations are sometimes accompanied by public hearings conducted by the agency proposing the regulation. It is not debate on Capitol Hill, but there is certainly ample opportunity for public discussion of most proposed regulations.

   Sometimes, proposed regulations are not published in advance to allow for comment. However, the Administrative Procedures Act allows for this in cases where agency has “good cause” for not publishing the proposed regulation. Federal courts have already narrowly construed what “good cause” means and when it applies.

   The A.P.A. also mandates an appeal and review process so that those adversely affected by a regulation can seek redress with the agency that issued the regulation. Beyond that, the A.PA. also allows for judicial review of regulations. An affected entity can challenge a federal regulation in federal court, but only after having sought redress with the agency charged with enforcing the regulation.

   In short, the rule-making process has the appropriate checks & balances, such that it is hardly as arbitrary as you make out to seem. Granted, no system is perfect, but the rule-making process is no where near being “an end run around the Constitution” as your article seems to suggest.

   Sharif Abdrabbo
   2L
   Salmon P. Chase Colleg of Law
   Northern Kentucky University

---