On January 30, President Trump signed an Executive Order (number to be determined) establishing new principles for the exercise of statutory discretion by Executive branch agencies. The Order directs agencies “to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations” (Sec. 1), caps net regulatory costs for FY 2017 at zero and requires agencies to rescind at least two existing regulations for each new regulation promulgated (Sec. 2), and establishes a process whereby the Office of Management and Budget would establish a regulatory budget for each agency (Sec. 3(d)).
Recent controversies over the resettlement of refugees from the Middle East (especially Syria), both in Europe and the United States, have been dominated by emotionally charged rhetoric. Taking a step way from that may be helpful for objectively illuminating both the problem and developing workable policy alternatives.
Lori Aratani and Paul Duggan of the Washington Post report on the controversy about which agency should oversee safety of the Washington DC subway system (“Metrorail”).
“A storm of online criticism has roiled the two largest fantasy-sports companies in North America,” writes Wall Street Journal reporter Sarah E. Needleman.
Three stories in the Washington Post show why compliance with federal information quality guidelines ought to be mandatory.
Laura Meckler of the Wall Street Journal reports that Sen. Bernie Sanders’ proposals to date would increase federal spending $18 trillion over ten years, “an increase of about one third in total federal outlays.”
There are a number of reasons for skepticism concerning these estimates, but missing from the usual list is the fact that regulation is a substitute for government expenditure.