I guess they’re remark is about the process, not about the rule change itself. (FTA) “the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit said this week that the FTC made a procedural error by failing to come up with a preliminary regulatory analysis, which is required for rules whose annual impact on the U.S. economy is more than $100 million.”
So, basically, for largish changes, the rules say you have to do some/lots of (I wouldn’t know which) extra work to check that a change will have the intended effect.
This should be a law that congress passes, not a rule that the executive branch passes. Demand your congressmen do their job my encoding this into a real law.
Congress can't. There is too much bad blood. Everything is viewed in through a partisan lens. If you want it, it must be bad for me, somehow.
Nor does it help to have a joint proposal. People who work across the aisle are seen as traitors -- they cannot be trusted to do the vital work of shooting down everything that the other side proposes.
It doesn't matter if the proposal is overwhelmingly supported. You will get very little credit from your constituents even if it passes. As much as people would like this bill, it's nobody's top priority.
Congress is barely able to pass anything. Frequently, it can't even pass a budget -- the basic operation of just keeping the lights on. Everything else is renaming post offices.
The entire point of the civil service is to pass basic functionality off onto a nonpartisan set of functionaries. But those functionaries are now widely considered the enemy, and so that method of accomplishing governance is also blocked. Congress will not re-open it, for exactly the same reasons that governance was blocked in the first place.
