The Trump administration is doing by fiat what it has struggled to accomplish through lengthy rulemaking: dismantle federal regulations designed to protect workers, consumers, investors and the environment.
Invoking an economic “emergency” stemming from the coronavirus pandemic, the administration has made it harder for people to challenge inaccuracies on credit reports, eased required breaks for commercial truckers, told factories and power plants that they should obey pollution limits but did not have to monitor or report their emissions routinely, among other things.
President Trump formalized this strategy two weeks ago when he signed an executive order instructing agencies across the government to rescind, modify or simply stop enforcing regulations if they burden the economy. On Thursday , he signed another order to allow agencies to waive 50-year-old environmental laws to speed federal approvals of pipelines, highways, and other projects.
The president took the actions even as he celebrated a 13.3 percent unemployment rate Friday and said the economy was surging in “the greatest comeback in American history.”
His executive orders have resurrected a long-running debate about whether regulation hurts the economy.
“This is a huge win for pro-growth policies,” said David McIntosh, president of the Club for Growth, in a recent call with reporters.
The moves come on top of waivers that federal agencies had already granted businesses and industries earlier in the health crisis. The White House will seek to make many of those roughly 600 deregulatory actions permanent, according to a former White House official speaking on the condition of anonymity to talk frankly.
As the virus spread across the United States earlier this year and the economy cratered, officials looked for places to pare back.
The federal consumer watchdog agency suspended requirements that financial institutions investigate disputed information on consumers’ credit reports. The Department of Labor relaxed some worker protections, including how businesses report paid sick leave. The Food and Drug Administration cut the time it takes to approve new antimicrobial products from years to months.
Major conservative groups and trade associations, which decry many federal regulations as overreach, are rushing to present even more ideas. These include setting aside labor requirements on infrastructure projects; speeding up vaccine and treatment approvals; limiting corporate liability; lifting restrictions on telemedicine so people can see doctors across state lines; and loosening wetlands protections so farmers can install stocked fish ponds or other features.
But others warn that the president is overstepping his authority, and the executive orders will collapse in the face of legal challenges.
“The good news is that the president has once again assumed he possesses absolute power to say what the law is, but he does not,” said Richard Lazarus, a Harvard University professor of environmental law, in an email. “That is the job of the courts, and they will reject the president’s effort to sweep away critically important public health protections enacted by Congress and signed by prior Republican and Democratic presidents.”
Still, even if interest groups battle rollbacks in court, federal officials could just stop enforcing some regulations, said New York University School of Law professor Richard Revesz. “Agencies have a fair amount of discretion of when to bring enforcement actions,” he said.
For more than a century, Congress has created agencies and regulations to oversee activities it didn’t have the expertise to handle, mostly to protect the public.
In 1887, for example, the federal government established the Interstate Commerce Commission to manage the exorbitant rates railroads were charging farmers and merchants. The first federal mine safety statute passed in 1891, and Upton Sinclair’s portrait of the unsanitary meatpacking industry in “The Jungle” spurred the creation of the Food and Drug Administration in 1906. Other regulations do everything from protecting competition to bolstering financial stability to requiring equipment to make offshore oil spills less likely.
Trump’s executive order in May, however, freed the agencies from enforcing regulations that “may inhibit economic recovery” on a temporary or permanent basis.
“The point is to tell the agencies not to throw the book at someone acting in good faith,” said a senior administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal thinking about the policy.
The order Thursday directed agencies to waive requirements imposed by laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act if that could accelerate the construction of highways, pipelines and other projects. These laws require agencies to solicit public input on projects proposed in their communities and analyze in detail how they could potentially harm the environment.
The president said he was acting because of dire economic circumstances brought on by the pandemic. But his desire to weaken the 50-year-old National Environmental Policy Act predates the eruption of coronavirus in the United States. In early January, he railed against the law and proposed fundamental changes to weaken it.
One sign of industry’s appetite for regulatory relief can be seen on the state level in Minnesota, where pollution regulators have received more than 500 requests for “regulatory flexibility” because of covid-19 and been granted more than 93 percent of them.