Let Congress vote on major rules

Photo of Susan Dudley and Jeff Rosen
Susan Dudley and Jeff Rosen
  • See All Articles
  • Subscribe to RSS
  • Bio

      Susan Dudley and Jeff Rosen

      Jeff Rosen is a partner at the international law firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP, based in its Washington, D.C. office. He served in senior government positions from 2003 to 2009. During those years, Rosen served as General Counsel of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), as a member of the Board of Directors of Amtrak, and as General Counsel and Senior Policy Advisor at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

      Susan Dudley is Director of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center, which works to raise awareness of regulations’ effects and improve regulatory policy through research, education, and outreach.
      From April 2007 through January 2009, Professor Dudley served as the Presidentially-appointed Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the U.S. Office of Management and Budget and was responsible for the review of draft executive branch regulations under Executive Order 12866, the collection of federal-government-wide information under the Paperwork Reduction Act, the development and
      implementation of government-wide policies in the areas of information policy, privacy, and statistical policy, and international regulatory cooperation efforts.

      Prior to OIRA, she directed the Regulatory Studies Program at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and taught courses on regulation at the George Mason University School of Law. Earlier in her career, Ms. Dudley served as an economist at OIRA, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency and the Commodity Futures
      Trading Commission. She was also a consultant to government and private clients at Economists Incorporated. She holds a Master of Science degree from the Sloan School of Management at MIT and a Bachelor of Science degree (summa cum laude) in Resource Economics from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Every year, more than 60 federal agencies issue thousands of new regulations covering every sector of the American economy. The Small Business Administration estimates the cumulative costs of these regulations at more than $1 trillion annually, or more than $10,000 per household per year. These regulations are legally binding, yet they emerge from unelected officials in regulatory agencies; Congress never has to vote to approve them.

Over the last few decades, on average, between 30 and 40 of the new final regulations issued each year have been considered “major,” with impacts of more than $100 million. In the past year-and-a-half, federal agencies have issued 94 major final rules (59 in 2009, and another 35 already this year). The costs of many of these are measured in the billions and even tens of billions of dollars.

For example, last year the Department of Energy issued costly regulations restricting certain kinds of light bulbs, as well as standards for clothes washers, while the Department of Interior issued rules on alternate energy uses of the Outer Continental Shelf. The Department of Transportation issued a $10 billion rule requiring railroads to use “positive train controls,” and another $1 billion rule requiring stronger car roofs (despite the DOT’s analysis indicating the benefits would not justify the increase in consumer prices). This year, the DOE added another rule setting standards for pool heaters and water heaters, while DOT and the Environmental Protection Agency issued a $60 billion regulation increasing auto fuel economy, and the Federal Aviation Administration issued a $7 billion rule to change aircraft equipage requirements. And the EPA issued rules to begin to regulate most of the economy to try to limit global warming.

Regardless of whether these rules are good or bad, there is no question they involve very significant costs for our economy, possibly slowing the recovery and hindering job creation.

Moreover, the Obama administration’s current “Regulatory Agenda” identifies almost 4,000 regulations under development, 191 of which involve more than $100 million each. The costs of these mandates sometimes dwarf the budgets of the regulatory agencies that produce them, yet these “off-budget” rules are not subject to the same scrutiny as on-budget spending. Congress had to vote to approve the nearly $13 billion used to fund the Department of Labor in 2009, for example, but did not vote with regard to any of the 10 major final rules the department issued in the last year and a half. Throughout our government, regulatory agencies cannot hire staff or spend money without approval from Congress, but they routinely issue regulations that impose huge costs without any congressional approval.

Our government was built on the dual principles of separation of powers — with “all legislative powers … vested in a Congress of the United States” — and checks and balances. Over the last century, Congress has delegated more and more legislative authority to the Executive Branch, but it need not give up accountability for these administrative laws.

  • Scrap Iron

    I am in a but of a quandary over this.
    Legislature passes laws.
    Executive branch formulates rules to enforce law.
    Now, I don’t like most of these bureaucratic nightmares, but how much authority
    should we extend BACK to the congress?
    Like I said, I’m in a quandary over this question.