Federal agencies are under orders from President Donald Trump, who campaigned against bureaucratic red tape and its burden on businesses, to identify at least two existing regulations for elimination every time they issue a new regulation. The USDA had no comment on which rules it might drop.
As nine owners of small businesses watched, Trump signed the executive order, which he called “the largest-ever cut by far in terms of regulation.” The president said he hoped up to 75 percent of federal regulations would be eliminated while he was president. Besides the two-for-one reduction in regulations, the executive order requires agencies during this fiscal year to see there is no net cost from new regulations after the cost of compliance with repealed regulations is deducted.
Federal regulations, especially those from the EPA, are a routine target of complaint by farm groups. They spearheaded opposition to the Waters of the United States rule, which delineates the upstream reach of clean water laws. At the American Farm Bureau Federation convention early this month, president Zippy Duvall said regulatory reform is vital: “We can’t just pull up the weeds. We have to get right down to the roots that allow those weeds to keep coming back again and again.”
The White House regards the deregulatory order as “the most important administrative action in the world of regulatory affairs since President Reagan” established the White House budget office as the gatekeeper for new regulations, two senior administration officials said during a briefing. The officials did not say how long it would take to see significant results. Change in regulation would occur in the usual rule-writing process, which includes public notice and comment periods, and can stretch for months or years in some instances.
Trump’s order focused on costs and did not mention benefits that could accrue from regulation, such as safer food. Cost-benefit analyses are a standard part of consideration of proposed regulations at present. The order exempts regulations involving military, national security, foreign affairs and agency management and allows the White House budget office to make other exceptions.
The two-for-one rule would not apply to independent agencies nor does it affect regulations that are required by law.
“We believe it is the role of government to set reasonable rules for the marketplace that protect consumers from dangers like predatory lending, dirty air and water, foodborne diseases, and unsafe medications,” said Laura MacCleery of Consumer Reports. “This order is telling federal agencies to trade off one rule that improves health or safety for two other rules, and that does not make sense.”