Brunell: Obama’s push for new regulations will hurt America

The Affordable Care Act is responsible for one in four major new regulations. The ACA was unwisely jammed through Congress with major policy-setting provisions left to be written by staff and bureaucrats who are not directly accountable to the voters.

George Washington University’s Regulatory Studies Center analyzes federal rulemaking and found that in his first seven years, Obama issued 392 major regulations. The “major” designation means each carries an expected economic effect exceeding $100 million annually. Forty-seven more sit on the drawing board.

Obama’s tally already tops the totals during the eight-year tenures of George W. Bush (358) and Bill Clinton (361).

Wall Street Journal reporter Nick Timiraos wrote: “Raw tallies can be imprecise because they obscure particularly consequential regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency’s clean power plant rules issued last year, for example, would require a 32% cut in power plant carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 from 2005 levels. Such a bid to address climate change aims to reshape how energy is produced in America.”

Business leaders are calling for regulatory reforms.

“Without systemic reform, we will continue to see agencies like EPA roll out massive new regulations with little concern for costs, practicality, or even legality, and with real consequences for U.S. jobs, economic growth, and personal and economic freedoms,” wrote Tom Donohue, U.S. Chamber of Commerce president.

Even before the president’s recent regulatory surge, the National Association of Manufacturers  reported federal government regulations cost an estimated $2.028 trillion in 2012; an amount equal to 12 percent of GDP.

NAM found regulatory expenses were distributed across major business types and among firms of different sizes. It determined that compliance costs fall disproportionately on small businesses. In 2012, a manufacturer employing fewer than 50 people, faced $12,000 a year in regulatory costs for each employee.

Neither GWU nor NAM added in the financial impact of state and local regulations, but they are substantial. For example, Gov. Jay Inslee is considering new air quality rules dubbed “cap and trade.” Though stymied by the legislature, his regulations under development at the Department of Ecology would cap carbon dioxide emissions and force those exceeding the cap to pay stiff fines.

Utah-based Energy Strategies found that Inslee’s “cap and trade” rule increased gas, heat and electricity costs by $56 a month for the average family and over the next 20 years our state will have 56,000 fewer jobs.

Overturning these precedent-setting executive regulations too often leads those impacted to challenge them in court. That is time consuming and expensive. Members of legislatures and Congress are also fighting back by cutting funding to enforce them.

Hopefully, many of the far-reaching rules on the drawing board will get sidetracked. They will hurt workers and their families, result in job losses and put America at a further competitive disadvantage.

Don Brunell, retired as president of the Association of Washington Business, is a business analyst, writer, and columnist. He lives in Vancouver and can be contacted at TheBrunells@msn.com