President Trump Signs EO Authorizing DOGE Deregulation Initiative

Steven Lofchie Commentary by Steven Lofchie
"It is the policy of my Administration to focus the executive branch's limited enforcement resources on regulations squarely authorized by constitutional Federal statutes, and to commence the deconstruction of the overbearing and burdensome administrative state."
Executive Order
"It is the policy of my Administration to focus the executive branch's limited enforcement resources on regulations squarely authorized by constitutional Federal statutes, and to commence the deconstruction of the overbearing and burdensome administrative state."
Executive Order

President Trump signed an Executive Order ("EO") directing federal agencies to coordinate with the Department of Government Efficiency ("DOGE"), to "review all regulations subject to their sole or joint jurisdiction for consistency with law and Administration policy."

The EO requires agency heads to identify regulations that are "unconstitutional," "based on unlawful delegations of legislative power," or that "impose significant costs upon private parties that are not outweighed by public benefits." The EO mandates that agencies de-prioritize actions to enforce regulations that go beyond the powers vested in the Federal Government by the Constitution and "direct the termination of all such enforcement proceedings" that do not align with "the Constitution, laws, or Administration policy."

The Office of Management and Budget is tasked with issuing "implementation guidance, as appropriate" and developing a "Unified Regulatory Agenda" to "rescind or modify" regulations identified as unlawful or burdensome.

Note: President Trump recently signed an EO requiring federal agencies to repeal "at least 10 existing rules, regulations, or guidance documents" for every new rule or regulation created. (See related coverage.)

Commentary

These Executive Orders signal a massive cultural shift for the regulators. For many years, it has been largely expected that laws and rules would simply accrete, along with the size of the government. New problems would bring new rules and new agencies, and there would be little meaningful re-examination of whether an existing rule was still needed, or even whether it had worked in the first place.

A cultural shift that assumes that an adopted rule is not an inherently forever thing, is of great importance. No business enterprise could survive if it was not willing to re-examine its past practices. If the financial regulators spend the next four years devoting as much energy to rule repeal as they do to rule adoption, the economy will not only survive, but very likely benefit.  

Email me about this

Tags