Let's start with posts #1419 and #1420 boys. And pragmatism is what we're shooting for.
"Regulation" is a horribly loaded, and overloaded, term. I'd suggest that we be more explicit when characterizing laws that might otherwise be referred to as "regulation".
For example, in my view one of the larger areas of dysfunction in what we often refer to as the "regulatory state", is the trend toward rulemaking that happens outside the traditional legislative process, usually by decree of appointed "czars" or committees. These rulemakers are generally disconnected from the voting public and far more responsive to lobbyists from the interest groups most impacted by the regulation.
That is the exact concept the Heritage paper was addressing. Congress comes up with a broad concept of something they think would be a good thing for the federal government to do; i.e. fund Head Start or authorize an EPA. But that's where our elected representatives participation in the process pretty well ends.
From then on, it is unelected bureaucrats who write rules and regulations that are treated as law of the land. And the problems that creates are shouted down by those who say that we MUST have federal regulations to protect our fisheries, to control what people are allowed to dump into the oceans and waterways, to expel into the air, to put into the foods that are sold in the grocery stores, etc.
And I agree. There is a role for the federal government in that capacity. But should Congress itself be involved and sign off on what that role is?
From the Heritage piece:
. . .How, exactly, does the administrative state do harm to our basic principles? There are four major constitutional problems.
- The administrative state combines the powers of government in the hands of the same officials in violation of the separation of powers principle.
- It is based on unconstitutional delegations of legislative power from Congress to bureaucrats and administrators.
- It violates the principle of republican government, which requires that power—especially legislative power—be derived from the consent of the governed, expressed directly or indirectly through elections.
- The administrative process it follows to adjudicate disputes is fundamentally opposed to the protections offered by the rule of law in the traditional judicial process.
All four of these constitutional issues are alarming, but when they are considered together, it becomes apparent that the administrative state is nothing short of a transformation of the American regime from a republic to a bureaucracy.
To answer your question.
Yes, I would rather have my neighbor, the marine biologist with experience in, you know, fishing who works for the EPA, making decisions about the fisheries than the junior Senator from Nebraska.
