Regulation Decimation Act: For Every New Rule, Ten Must Go

The "Regulation Decimation Act" is straightforward: if a federal agency wants to introduce a new regulation that impacts individuals, businesses, or state/local governments, they first need to axe at least ten existing rules. And if it's a major rule (one with significant economic impact), the cost of the new rule must be less than or equal to the combined cost of the ten they're getting rid of. (SEC. 2)

Killing Rules to Make Rules?

The core of this bill forces a 10-to-1 rule repeal ratio. The idea is that for every new regulation, ten old ones related to it have to be eliminated. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) gets to decide if the costs balance out, acting as the financial gatekeeper. (SEC. 2)

This raises a practical question: what if there aren't ten related rules to cut? The bill includes the phrase "to the extent practicable," which could become a loophole. Does this mean an agency can skip the repeal if they claim it's not "practicable"? That ambiguity is worth watching. (SEC. 2)

Real-World Rollout

Imagine a small manufacturing business dealing with a stack of OSHA safety regulations. If OSHA wants to introduce a new rule about, say, updated machine guarding standards, they'd have to find and eliminate ten existing safety rules. This could mean streamlining outdated regulations, but it also risks removing protections that are still relevant. The owner of that business might see reduced paperwork, but potentially at the cost of worker safety. (SEC. 2)

Or consider a local farmer dealing with EPA rules on pesticide use. If the EPA introduces a new regulation on a specific chemical, ten other rules related to pesticides might need to go. While some might be genuinely outdated, others could be important for protecting water quality or the health of farmworkers. The farmer might see fewer restrictions, but the long-term consequences for the environment and public health are less clear. (SEC. 2)

What's "Costly, Ineffective, Duplicative, or Outdated" Anyway?

Within 90 days of this bill becoming law, agencies must report to Congress and the OMB, identifying rules they consider "costly, ineffective, duplicative, or outdated." (SEC. 2) Those are pretty subjective terms. What one agency head considers "ineffective," another might see as essential. This reporting requirement could add a significant workload, but the real question is how these terms will be applied in practice.

Also, in five years, the President has to report on the total number of rules and the progress of rule reduction. (SEC. 2) This creates a long-term focus on shrinking the rulebook, regardless of whether those rules are actually causing problems.

The Big Picture

This bill is all about deregulation. It aims to force agencies to constantly cut existing rules, with the stated goal of reducing burdens and boosting the economy. But the mandatory 10-to-1 ratio and the vague "to the extent practicable" clause raise concerns. Will agencies prioritize cutting costs over maintaining important protections? Will this actually make things simpler, or just create new uncertainties? Those are the key questions to keep in mind as this bill moves forward.