REINS proposal guarantees government gridlock

Published February 10, 2016

By Rob Schofield

by Rob Schofield, NC Policy Watch, February 9, 2016.

So-called “REINS Act” would pose grave threat to consumers, environment, public health and safety

With all of the damage the political Right has done to the public services and structures of North Carolina over the past five years, some observers may be of the impression that the worst is over.

Think again.

If these folks get their way the Tea Party revolution is just getting underway.

The latest volley in this destructive war on all things public was fired last week at a legislative study committee meeting in Raleigh at which representatives of a local “think tank” funded by conservative financier Art Pope advanced the enormously destructive idea of enacting something with the tortured and Orwellian title “Regulations From the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act” or “REINS” for short. 

The basic idea: To pass a new state law that would require legislative approval for every “major” rule enacted by state administrative agencies. The idea is copied from a similar proposal hatched at the federal level a few years back by business lobbyists and right-wing advocacy groups. Fortunately, the federal version of the REINS proposal has yet to be enacted. In an apparent attempt, however, to inch the camel’s nose under the tent at the state level, conservative advocates are now pushing the idea here. 

This is from an account of last week’s meeting of a legislative study committee in Raleigh’s NC Insider newsletter:

Conservative think tank the John Locke Foundation told the Joint Legislative Administrative Procedure Oversight Committee that a state level version [of the REINS Act] could ease the private market’s ability to grow here and slow the stream of rules that agencies can write without language approval from the legislature. ‘The least regulated industries over time have proven to grow faster,’ Jon Sanders, the foundation’s director of regulatory studies, said in the group’s second consecutive address to the members of committee as a part of a published agenda. In January, a special panel of the committee’s members heard a presentation from the foundation on the state’s occupational licensing boards. Sen. Andy Wells, R Catawba, a committee member and chairman of the panel, is a former member of the foundation’s board, which he disclosed.” 

Locke representatives went on to assert that administrative agency rules enacted without specific legislative approval amount to lawmaking “without the consent of the governed.”

You got that? In the strange, ideology-trumps-common-sense world of the market fundamentalists, North Carolina ought not to have any major government rules to protect the public from, say, dangerous day care operators, emitters of toxic air pollution, predatory lenders or unsafe restaurants unless the General Assembly specifically approves each of them. 

Gridlock and greed

This is, of course, a wildly impractical and dangerous approach to 21st Century life. Not only would such a requirement result in the demise of countless rules targeting powerful industries (anyone want to guess what the homebuilder lobby would do at the General Assembly the next time regulators proposed an upgrade in the building or fire codes?), it’s also a guarantee of vastly more gridlock than is already afflicting our government.

Consider what advocates at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen wrote last year in response to the proposal of a federal REINS Act:

Enactment of The REINS Act would effectively end rulemaking given existing legislative gridlock and political polarization….If both chambers are unable to approve a major rule, it will not take effect and is tabled until the next Congressional session. The impact on all major rules, including the large number of non-controversial rules agencies produce every year, will be dramatic. Currently, it takes years for a federal agency to produce necessary public safeguards to address obvious safety gaps that have endangered and harmed the public. Indeed, this unfortunate reality was once again reinforced just this week. It took 5 years after the massive British Petroleum Oil Spill in the Gulf for the Department of Interior this week to produce a proposed rule regulating blowout preventers to address one of the main causes of the explosion and ensuing oil spill at the Deepwater Horizon oil rig….REINS would do nothing to speed up this process. Instead, it would allow nothing more than Congressional inaction to block such a common-sense, non-controversial rule.”

Of course, coming from business interests looking to maximize profits in every possible way at all times, something like the REINS proposal is no big surprise. It’s the brand of capitalism championed and practiced by robber barons of 19th Century America, the tycoons of modern day Russia and China, as well as the Koch Brothers and their ilk. 

Unfortunately, as is so often the case, the support of groups like the Locke Foundation provides an extra veneer that helps to insulate those interests from allegations of mere greed and gives them license to mount their high horses. You know how this rap goes and have no doubt heard it countless times before from paid, straight-faced corporate apologists: 

It’s not our own bottom line we’re really interested in; it’s our devotion to consumer choice and our desire to bring products and services to the market that our customers need and demand as quickly as possible that drives us.”

A through-the-looking-glass worldview

All in all, it’s truly a through-the-looking-glass approach to government and modern life that the REINS idea and its apologists represent. It’s a worldview in which the “freedom” not to be “burdened” with basic public rules to protect one’s fellow citizens from harm is a near-holy cause, while the genuine freedom – the kind that comes from health, safety and protection from financial exploitation for all – is so much chaff to be casually discarded. 

This is not hyperbole. At last week’s legislative meeting, a Locke Foundation spokesperson attempted to justify his support of the REINS proposal by explaining that modern day access to the Internet and the comments of other consumers on various websites can provide citizens with most, if not all, the information they need when purchasing a service or product (his example involved tourist attractions on a family vacation). He was, according to the accounts of those present, serious and well-received by the lawmakers present.

Let that sink in for a minute. Now consider what it would mean when it comes to things like food and drugs, public transit, environmental protection, predatory financial scams and any number of other vital matters affecting public safety and wellbeing. 

Concerned about whether that airliner you’re about to climb aboard has too many hours in service or cracks in its wings? Don’t worry; the “genius of the market” will take care of things. You know, airlines will be so worried about losing business after a couple of planes go down that they’ll “self-regulate.” And, of course, the same will be true for meat producers, drug manufacturers, building designers and high interest lenders. The power of caveat emptor will take care of everything.

The bottom line

None of this is to say that government regulations aren’t sometimes flawed or unnecessarily complex or poorly enforced. At last check, all of them were written, enacted and implemented by imperfect human beings – some of whom are not so hot at their jobs. North Carolina would do well to have a genuine and ongoing conversation (a truly representative conversation) about how it makes and enforces administrative agency rules and regulations. 

Unfortunately, that’s not what either the REINS idea or the people and groups behind it are really about. The familiar objective of all is to raze the system we have and return to a dark and dangerous era in which the only meaningful regulations on corporations were those that the plutocrats in charge deigned to bless. Especially in light of the already dramatically weakened state of North Carolina’s regulatory environment after five years of conservative rule, it is a terrible but sadly predictable situation.

http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2016/02/09/pope-funded-group-pushes-proposal-to-guarantee-government-gridlock/

February 10, 2016 at 10:23 am
Richard L Bunce says:

So NCPW wants unrestrained unelected government bureaucrats to implement their favored government policies via regulation that they cannot get enacted through legislation by winning elections in the legislature... we need the REINS Act very badly. The left had a field day in the judicial branch over the last several decades enacting by judicial fiat what they could not enact through legislation... now it's on to the government bureaucracy. NCPW is am sure for substantial increases in government bureaucrat compensation as well... quid pro quo Clarise, quid pro quo.

February 10, 2016 at 10:41 am
Norm Kelly says:

Another biased lib who bows at the alter of government over all.

From the start, this author proves how biased and dishonest he truly is. Left-wing zealots are simply named. Anything that comes from conservatives, Tea Party members, or Republicans is automatically disparaged, made fun of, put in quotes, and labeled as bad for the state and citizens.

Absurd government regulations do nothing but dampen the economy. Licensing boards are a perfect example. Can't install a security system unless you've apprenticed with a licensed installer for AT LEAST 3 years. Why? Keeps down competition for existing companies. Does nothing to insure safety or accuracy for the customer. Just because you work for someone who is licensed doesn't mean that you are doing everything right. And for 3 years? To install low-voltage equipment? Please be serious! By low-voltage, I mean 5 or 12 volts; kinda like putting a battery to your tongue to see if it's still usable. Not enough voltage to hurt a child. But it takes 3 years of apprenticeship to become licensed. Plus passing a test. Why? To reduce competition for existing companies. Yet some regulatory agency put this rule in place without legislative oversight?

Then there's the idea of other low-voltage equipment that regulators (read current businesses) want to regulate. Home theater installations, network installations, speaker wiring are all being considered for restrictive licensing requirements. I was once told by a Town inspector that I could NOT install Cat5E network cable in a business unless I had a low-voltage license. The inspector could NOT find the regulations stating so, but would not allow me to do the work anyway. I proved to the inspector, by looking it up in licensing documentation from the state, that he was wrong, but he refused to budge. Cat5E network cable carries about 5 volts. What's the challenge with pulling Cat5E at 5 volts without a license? And current businesses that carry a low-voltage license for other (useless) reasons want to restrict me from making money off this aspect of business. Not because it's hazardous or a safety issue for anyone, but only because these existing businesses can use the power of government to restrict competition. How much would it cost me to get licensed? The most recent proposal I've heard of concerning this licensing would also require 3 years' apprenticeship. For 5 volts!!? This is exactly why regulatory agencies NEED, REQUIRE oversight!

Then we also need to consider regulations imposed and enforced on much larger businesses for actual safety issues. Think Duke power. Ask yourself some important questions. First, who was in charge of regulating both Duke & Progress Energy FOR DECADES!? Who occupied both the legislature AND the govs mansion FOR DECADES!?! That's right, it was libs, demons, socialists, those that this author believes are better at protecting citizens. What exactly happened with the Duke coal ash ponds? FOR DECADES, the always honest N&D tells us, regulators KNEW that the ponds were leaking. What was done about it? How did the regulators PROTECT citizens? What part of the existing regulations protected citizens? How did the lib-appointed regulators protect us? Answer, cuz libs aren't capable of coming up with it on their own, is obviously NOTHING! The N&D is known for telling the entire story every time, known for being political watchdogs regardless of party affiliation, never holding back on reporting, always has active reporters in the field, and endorses candidates based strictly on their ideas and plans. Keeping this in mind, why would we not believe the N&D when they tell us that regulators, demon regulators, KNEW the coal ash ponds were leaking for decades? (note: i'm well aware that my description of the n&d is totally inaccurate, distorted, dishonest, so don't call me on this. but libs - and n&d employees - want us to believe the n&d is non-biased, fair, truthful, so on the coal ash issue we should accept this evaluation of their stories.) So, libs, tell us why we should trust that regulators are the least bit concerned about protecting us! What part of preventing competition for existing business, or refusing to implement existing regulations, helps to protect us? How does ignoring coal ash pond leaks - for decades - protect anyone? How does forcing me to get a license to install 5-volt wiring protect anyone's safety? I've been doing low-voltage wiring for about 20 years, yet the new licensing requirements could possibly cause me to be someone's apprentice for up to 3 years in order to do it on my own again. That is, if regulators are allowed to implement business protecting, economic stifling regulations without oversight.