Trump’s Assault on the Environment is Just a Small Sliver of the Whole
Those of us who see the world primarily through an environmental lens tend to focus our anguish on things like the gutting of the EPA, the construction of new pipelines, the overturn of the Clean Power Plan, the Clean Air Act, and so forth. However, the Washington DC-based non-profit think-tank “Public Citizen” reminds us that one of Trump’s recent executive orders mandates the elimination of existing rules for the purpose of offsetting the costs of new rules — while ignoring the benefits — even if the existing rules are entirely unrelated. They write:
(Trump’s EO (executive order) is plain crazy … unless the motive is really to make it almost impossible for We the People to protect ourselves from dangerous products, risks to public health and the effects of climate change; it will require federal agencies to violate numerous statutes.
For example, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issues car safety standards. The EO will kill the proposal that new cars be required to have devices that let them “talk” to each other about speed, direction, braking status and the like. NHTSA estimates the devices could prevent nearly half a million crashes and save roughly 1,000 lives a year. Drivers could save as much as $71 billion — more than 10 times the cost. But under Trump’s absurd edict, NHTSA cannot issue that new standard unless it can find other rules to eliminate, in a process that focuses on costs and ignores benefits — money saved, crashes avoided, lives spared — of both the new and existing standards. It’s an impossible trade-off that requires the agency to make arbitrary decisions, in violation of the law and the agency’s responsibility to issue motor vehicle safety standards.
That, folks, is what the EO means to motor vehicle safety standards alone. For a moment, let your imagination wander and contemplate a few of the hundreds of other ways your families’ lives are endangered.
This whole thing sounds like a bad dream. I’m trying to awaken but can’t seem to do it.
From what you have said and my understanding Trump’s rule would not prevent Congress from enacting a law that included the regulation, nor would it prevent a court from including such a mandate in a decision.
Both of these methods are likely to be more costly than the relatively easy regulations. So the Trump mandate would seem to be poorly considered with unintended consequences.
yes Frank and Breath – the extreme ideological makeup of the those now in Power represents a serious threat to our civil society and Roll back the good progress that has been made.
Maybe its their last hurrah – like the cuts to the IRS by the GOP has resulted in a reduction in agents and tax audits and the agency and even Trumpers chief of something says they could raise $ 6 to $ 8 billion in needed revenue.
The old saying cutting off your own Space to make a foolish point. Throwing the Baby Out with the Dirty bathwater its self limiting for sure…
Craig,
It depends on how you interpret the President’s order.
President Trump’s order has caused panic and hyperventilation among those who don’t seem to understand, or bothered to the order.
There’s nothing new or strange about the order. This process has been successful in Canada, where for every rule imposed one had to go. The UK has worked with the one in, two out approach favored by the President for over a decade.
Rules compound for decades with very little rollback ever taking place. It’s a responsible and reasonable request to ensure any time an agency issues a regulation, it should remove a similar magnitude of regulatory burden (or, better, two) somewhere else.
Obviously, this doesn’t apply to rules enshrined by legislation.
Nor does the Presidential order absolutely require agencies repeal two older rules for every new one they propose.
Perusal of the order reveals that an agency is only required to “identify” two rules able to be revoked and find ways to offset costs of new rules.
The removal of older rules are also subject to a review process, where exceptions can be granted. The new order doesn’t require the repeal of two regulations to be simultaneous with the release of additional rules.
There’s also an extensive list of rules and regulation exempt from the President’s order.
In 2010 the US Auditor-General identified a vast raft of obsolete or redundant regulations costing Americans $162 billion per year. By 2016 far from lessening the burden, the Obama administration allowed an increase to $378 billion.
The Presidential order also provides a reveiw process to “fine tune” implementation and ensure unintentional negative effects are identified and eliminated.
Craig, I hope you don’t think this is an impertinent question, but do you ever actually read and analyses these orders, or just gain your information from left wing media reports ?
Had you actually read the order, you might have realized how silly your example of the motor vehicle safety standards sounds !
(Although, the Automobile Association of America has identified more than 270 regulations relating to steam cars, and wooden spoked wheels still in existence.I think it’s possible some of those could be consolidated without greatly effecting road safety, don’t you ?)