(Page 2 of 2)
Writes Karasmeighan: “These hidden costs slow the economy, as they introduce inefficiencies and distortions, and reduce the economic reward left over for productive activity.” Slower economic growth means lower production, smaller wages, and fewer jobs. By some estimates the efficiency losses of regulation run as much as $1.5 trillion, rivaling or exceeding compliance costs.
The regulatory burden, too, is likely to continue going up. Since regulatory costs are less visible, people tend to be less aware of the threat of increased regulation and less able to mobilize against new regulatory proposals. ATR warns that “with the combination of the Democrat Congress and lobbying by the new constituencies created by recent regulations, the upward trend of regulations will continue in future years.
IN FACT, THE COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE has issued its own comprehensive report on federal regulation, authored by Clyde Wayne Crews, Jr. The scope and sweep of government, and especially federal, controls are enormous.
According to economist Mark Crain, regulatory compliance costs ran $1.142 trillion last year. By way of comparison, Crews points out that this number exceeds total income tax collections and accounts for about nine percent of GDP. But that’s not the end: “The Weidenbaum Center and the Mercatus Center jointly estimate that agencies spent $41 billion to administer and police the regulatory state in 2006,” writes Crews.
There are a number of ways to measure the regulatory state. For instance, the Federal Register contained 74,937 pages last year, a 1.4 percent increase (though still below the number in 2004). Although the number of pages was up, the number of final rules fell six percent, to 3,718. Notes Crews: “Well over 48,000 final rules were issued from 1995 to 2006 — that is, during Republican control of Congress.”
More than 4,000 rules are currently in the federal pipeline, 139 of which are considered to be “economically significant,” that is, likely to have an economic impact of at least $100 million. That number is up slightly from 2005.
Five agencies account for almost half of all regulations: Treasury Department, Environmental Protection Agency, Agriculture Department, Interior Department, and Commerce Department. The issues run the gamut: substances prohibited for use in animal feed and food; country-of-origin labels for food; nondiscrimination in public facilities; occupational exposure to diseases and substances; automobile fuel economy standards; energy efficiency rules; emission standards; satellite broadcasting signal carriage requirements; home safety rules; furniture flammability standards; and many, many more.p>The problem is not that all regulations are unnecessary or badly designed or unduly costly. The problem is that we have trouble assessing the relative merits of various regulations, and, more important, policymakers usually have no interest in such assessments even if they exist. Observes Crews: br> /p>
We simply do not know whether regulatory benefits exceed costs. But agencies are not the real culprits. Congress regularly shirks its constitutional duty tomake the tough calls. It delegates considerable law-making power to agencies, and then it fails to ensure that they deliver benefits that are greater than costs. Thus, agencies can hardly be faulted for not guaranteeing optimal regulation or for not ensuring that only “good” rules get through.br> Since legislators are no more likely tomorrow than today to find the courage necessary to fulfill their constitutional duty to constrain agency rule-making, regulatory costs seem destined to continue rising. Crews calls for “making Congress as accountable for regulation as for legislation.” It’s a great idea. But Congress is as likely to accept regulatory responsibility as Congress is likely to eliminate the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Housing, and Transportation, the sources of so many unnecessary and expensive boondoggles. Or to eliminate the income tax, while cutting expenditures accordingly.
If there is any good news, it is that some states are better than others. In Alabama and Oklahoma taxpayers finished paying for government on June 22. Residents of Alaska and Mississippi quit paying on June 23. Seven more states finished in June
Unfortunately, people in sixteen states, along with the District of Columbia, will continue paying for days, or weeks, later. Connecticut sets the record: August 2. New York trails at July 28. New Jersey follows on July 22. Of Connecticut, Karasmeighan explains, the burden “is so onerous both because it has very high relative incomes, getting a big hit from the federal income tax, and because it has high state and local taxes.”
The mantra from the left continues to be that Americans are undertaxed; the public sector is starved of funds; there is no problem that a new government program cannot solve. But the numbers prove otherwise. Today government spending and regulation take more than half of our national income. That’s a far heavier burden than a free people should ever accept.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?