Lofty Laws Hurting the Economy?
Sen. Mike Lee, (R-Utah), on the federal regulatory monster.
- Duration 6:36
- Date May 4, 2012
Sen. Mike Lee, (R-Utah), on the federal regulatory monster.
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
People want government to keep us safe.
And keep us from being cheated and -- politicians and bureaucrats keep passing -- adding more rules here they are.
That's how many of the Fed's alone of past they had a thousand new pages of this garbage no laws regulations every week.
But I say it doesn't help us to Justin Rich's lawyers and bureaucrats it makes us poorer and less safe and less free.
And one of the few politicians in the senate who understands that is Utah senator Mike -- so I'm -- picture there.
With all those socialists so -- would you understand it.
You got that your father used to talk about the constitution that breakfast table.
Yes and to lunch and dinner table as well we talked about a lot.
And what's don't know what how do you see this happening how do you see it ever being solved.
It's easy for elected politicians to -- to speak and lofty glowing terms about things that sound perfectly on objectionable.
Let's have clean air for example so why -- -- there yeah who wasn't head but then we outsource the task of defining what clean air means and how that's going to be enforced.
And those people who make those rules which are as you point out laws.
Those people -- elected and they don't work for anyone who is elected and that's a problem.
And you wrote a book.
Chapter seven you talk about the federal regulatory monster.
Yes our laws most of them.
Are not being passed are not being put in place by people were elected in this is utterly incompatible.
Would article one section one article one section seven of the constitution which went out of their way to make sure.
Anyone making laws that is rules -- in the force of generally applicable law.
Have to be passed by people in congress who were elected every two years in the case of the house in every six years in the case of the senate.
And I'll play devil's advocate.
So what it's all stuff that some posts make life better.
It's supposed to make life better and we want to believe that it will.
We want there had to be clean air we wanna pursue all the broad lofty goals that are promised to us in these -- -- broad laws passed by congress.
But one of the problems that we have is when you insulate those who write those laws and who are also the same people enforcing them.
From the people affected by them and from the voters.
Then they don't look at the fact that they're not always accomplishing what they're supposed to accomplish in fact sometimes they're having exactly the opposite effect.
And they're making all of us poor.
And mid intuition.
Tells us that passing laws is a good thing they kids who tour.
The state capitals in DC they don't come up to you and saying senator what laws that you repeal.
They say why -- gotten past that's being a good citizen that's right -- and politicians tend to be.
Given the most accolades when they passed laws or when they fund programs to the tune of billions and billions of towers and a time.
That's when we get praised the most and we need to start recognizing that individuals regulate themselves much better than government can in most areas.
So I wrote a book -- know they can't playing off Obama's yes we can't slogan which argues that.
It's intuitive to think the government has to do these thinks that without.
These new rules life would be ugly the poor would suffer.
I've read your book and and are you -- -- what I don't like -- and senators read this thing and I I love it did this sends a message that.
People need to read.
It and but as you point -- your book sometimes -- intuition is wrong.
This is one of those areas where human intuition often is wrong perhaps is something primal and that's for -- -- something cultural that wants us.
To think yeah let's have some of these important decisions made village wide.
But village wide of course is good -- is put it Dulles don't want is very different than nationwide especially in a nation of 300 million people like ours.
Commit itself and the here senator save us it's great and -- you went to law school and BYU.
I assume they taught you likely teach all lawyers.
That life can be managed through Paper and procedure top down.
The law itself that lends itself to that kind of thinking.
It and it's not altogether wrong I mean there are after all some areas in which it's totally appropriate for us to have the sort of village elder deference on a national scale.
For instance when it comes to matters of national -- when it's time forced to go to war.
We need to rally behind a common leader and what we've identified that leader as -- president wore anything else are regulating trade between the states and with foreign nations that have to be handled at the national level -- need regulation why can't people trade voluntarily whatever they want well it's the extent of the regulation is of course -- -- critical question that we have to answer congress over the last 75 years with a little assistance from the Supreme Court.
Has -- kind of seem that as a perpetually Green light.
In terms of the regulatory burden where as you say there an automatic pilot a thousand pages a week.
Added you have sunset.
Proposal that would stop that yes.
The best proposal out there right now to wood -- to deal with the mission creep associated with the modern federal.
Is a proposal.
Called the -- -- REI and that's -- the minute rain and then it's it's.
It's a measure that of which -- and original cosponsor in the senate and here's what it says.
Says that anytime you have a new regulation -- the force of generally applicable federal law.
If it qualifies as a major rule under the OMB's review standards meaning it has an economic impact in excess of -- hundred million dollars annually nationwide.
Relatively easy hurdle to satisfy by the way.
Then that regulation will be viewed as a proposal.
-- it won't take effect until it's been passed into law like by the house representatives and by the senate and then it's -- submitted to the president for signature or -- In other words were requiring.
-- congress to fall the same procedure to enact these into law such that no such regulation.
Meeting these criteria -- become law.
Without congress acting that's exactly what the founding fathers had intended and that's what we need to do here.
Senator -- thank you for joining us I hope you can get rid of some of these rules I don't have.