Daily Times

At the first meeting of the Trump Leadership Council – an advisory group consisting of top CEOs from major companies – President Donald Trump asked these business leaders what was their biggest problem. I expected the answer to be America’s anti-growth tax system.

The CEOs almost all listed the federal tax code as an albatross, but not the heaviest one. But I was surprised to learn that most insisted he biggest restraint on growth is federal red tape and regulation. Manufacturers, energy firms, financial services, agriculture interests – across all industries – federal rules were seen as mindless, inefficient, costly and incomprehensible.

Mr. Trump is off to a speedy start in rolling back the rule making industry in Washington. He has signed an executive order which mandates that any agency wanting to implement a new business regulation must at the same time repeal two existing regs. This should reverse the tide of regulatory burdens.

There’s so much more to be done. And Congress, not just the president will have to play a lead role.

Time out for a civics lesson. One of the mysteries of American government over the last half-century is why the Congress has acceded so much law-making authority to what is now a questionable constitutional fourth branch of government. These agencies ranging from the SEC to the FTC to the FDA and dozens more have become fiefdoms that reign over private industries. They are effectively accountable to no one – and certainly not to Congress.

But, of course, Congress is supposed to make the laws – not unelected bureaucrats at the EPA or the CFTC. In the last decade or so, most of the big laws that affect private industry and consumers have been enacted by non-lawmakers.

The excuse from Congress is that there are so many rules and regulations that the House and Senate can’t possibly approve everyone of them. Well it’s true there are tens of thousand of these edicts. But isn’t that the crux of the problem?

A bigger problem is that agencies have become arrogant with power and desensitized to the impact of their litany of “thou shalls” and “thou shall nots.” Martha Kent of OSHA once put the attitude of these bureaucrats succinctly: “As long as I’m regulating, I’m happy.” She said she “absolutely loves” putting out “a reg” and that she was “born to regulate.” This sounds like someone who is clueless about private industry.

But who will stop bureaucrats like this who are drunk with power?: A new analysis by my colleague Jason Pye at Freedom Works finds that under Barack Obama there were well over 500 new regulations with costs to the economy of more than $100 million each. That means these imposed a minimum of $50 billion of cost to the economy. How many of these were overturned by a mostly Republican Congress? Exactly zero. The solution is a law that requires congressional approval before a regulation takes place. If I had my way, each and every new rule would only take effect after a vote of approval by the House and Senate. If they have to stay up until midnight to do it, so be it. That’s what we pay these people for. At the very least, the Regulations in Need of Scrutiny Act or “The REINS Act” would require congressional approval of any rule with a cost of $100 million to workers, employers, or consumers.