The incoming president and Cabinet nominees along with a GOP-majority Congress appear to be gearing up for a war on regulations, asserting the cost of compliance and deleterious effect on job growth. There usually is a cost in complying with regulations. However, those costs may be the best economic alternative to not having regulation. I have yet to see a concrete example of how deregulation has or will improve the job situation; I have seen concrete, historical examples of how lack of regulation was immensely harmful.
A regulation is typically birthed from an expressed or evident need of some sort — sounded good at the time and often still is. This is not to say all regulations are necessary; some may be outdated, duplicative, missing the target or incurring unforeseen consequences. Certainly regulations should undergo scrutiny. The danger lies in not: 1. Considering the value of each regulation individually. 2. Comparing compliance costs with costs, possibly long term, to no regulation. 3. Realizing that costs are sometimes something other than dollars, such as ethical behavior, fairness, justice.
Our elected representatives may have web pages, social media and news releases, but where the rubber meets the road is what are they voting for and against. Are they voting in a manner that matches the reason we elected them? Read The Columbian’s Washington Roll Call to see our representatives’ voting records.
