Attorney General Jeff Sessions Rescinds 24 Guidance Documents

"Atttorney General Jeff Sessions today announced that, consistent with his November 2017 memorandum prohibiting the Department from making rules without following the procedures required by Congress, he is rescinding 24 guidance documents that were unnecessary, outdated, inconsistent with existing law, or otherwise improper.

“The American people deserve to have their voices heard and a government that is accountable to them. When issuing regulations, federal agencies must abide by constitutional principles and follow the rules set forth by Congress and the President. In previous administrations, however, agencies often tried to impose new rules on the American people without any public notice or comment period, simply by sending a letter or posting a guidance document on a website. That’s wrong, and it’s not good government.

“In the Trump administration, we are restoring the rule of law. That’s why in November I banned this practice at the Department and we began rescinding guidance documents that were issued improperly or that were simply inconsistent with current law.

“Today we are rescinding 24 more and continuing to put an end to unnecessary or improper rulemaking.”

In February 2017, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 13777, which calls for agencies to establish Regulatory Reform Task Forces, chaired by a Regulatory Reform Officer, to identify existing regulations for potential repeal, replacement, or modification. The Department of Justice Task Force is chaired by Acting Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio.

In November 2017, the Attorney General issued a memorandum prohibiting Department of Justice (DOJ) components from using guidance documents to circumvent the rulemaking process and directed components to identify guidance documents that should be repealed, replaced, or modified.

The Task Force identified 25 guidance documents for repeal in December 2017 and has identified 24 more documents to repeal this month.  The Task Force is continuing its review of existing guidance documents to repeal, replace, or modify..."
Guidance documents voided

Regulatory Reform 10 Years After the Financial Crisis: Systemic Risk Regulation of Non-Bank Financial Institutions

"When large, interconnected financial institutions become distressed, policymakers have historically faced a choice between (1) a taxpayer-funded bailout, and (2) the destabilization of the financial system—a dilemma that commentators have labeled the “too-big-to-fail” (TBTF) problem. The 2007-2009 financial crisis highlighted the significance of the TBTF problem. During the crisis, a number of large financial institutions experienced severe distress, and the federal government committed hundreds of billions of dollars in an effort to rescue the financial system. According to some commentators, the crisis underscored the inadequacy of existing prudential regulation of large financial institutions, and of the bankruptcy system for resolving the failure of such institutions.

In response to the crisis, Congress passed and President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) in 2010. Titles I and II of Dodd-Frank are specifically directed at minimizing the systemic risk created by TBTF financial institutions. In order to minimize the risks that large financial institutions will fail, Title I of Dodd-Frank establishes an enhanced prudential regulatory regime for certain large bank holding companies and non-bank financial companies. In order to “resolve” (i.e., reorganize or liquidate) systemically important financial institutions, Title II establishes a new resolution regime available for such institutions outside of the Bankruptcy Code.."
Regulotory reform

Independence of Federal Financial Regulators: Structure, Funding, and Other Issues

"Conventional wisdom regarding regulators is that the structure and design of the organization matters for policy outcomes. Financial regulators conduct rulemaking and enforcement to implement law and supervise financial institutions. These agencies have been given certain characteristics that enhance their day-to-day independence from the President and Congress, which may make policymaking more technical and less “political” or “partisan,” for better or worse. Independence may also make regulators less accountable to elected officials and can reduce congressional influence, at least in the short term.

Although independent agencies share many characteristics, there are notable differences. Some federal financial regulators are relatively more independent in some areas but relatively less so in others..."
Financial regulations

Presidential Executive Order on Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda

"Executive Order
- - - - - - -

ENFORCING THE REGULATORY REFORM AGENDA

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to lower regulatory burdens on the American people by implementing and enforcing regulatory reform, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Policy.  It is the policy of the United States to alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens placed on the American people.

Sec. 2.  Regulatory Reform Officers.  (a)  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency, except the heads of agencies receiving waivers under section 5 of this order, shall designate an agency official as its Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO).  Each RRO shall oversee the implementation of regulatory reform initiatives and policies to ensure that agencies effectively carry out regulatory reforms, consistent with applicable law.  These initiatives and policies include..."
Presidential regulatory reform

Presidential Executive Order on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs

"REDUCING REGULATION AND CONTROLLING REGULATORY COSTS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921, as amended (31 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), section 1105 of title 31, United States Code, and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Purpose.  It is the policy of the executive branch to be prudent and financially responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public and private sources.  In addition to the management of the direct expenditure of taxpayer dollars through the budgeting process, it is essential to manage the costs associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations.  Toward that end, it is important that for every one new regulation issued, at least two prior regulations be identified for elimination, and that the cost of planned regulations be prudently managed and controlled through a budgeting process..."

 Executive Regulations

Can a New Administration Undo a Previous Administration's Regulations?

"Following the election of Donald J. Trump on November 8, 2016, questions have been raised as to whether and how a new President's administration can amend or repeal regulations issued by the previous administration. In short, once a rule has been finalized, a new administration would be required to undergo the rulemaking process to change or repeal all or part of the rule. If a rule has not yet been finalized, however, a new President may be able, immediately upon taking office, to prevent the rule from being issued. In addition to these administrative actions, Congress can also take legislative action to overturn rules.
Changing or Repealing Previously Issued Rules

Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), "rulemaking" is defined as "formulating, amending, or repealing a rule," meaning that an agency must follow the rulemaking procedures set forth by the APA and other statutory and executive order requirements to change or repeal a rule. (For more on these procedures, see CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking Process: An Overview, coordinated by Maeve P. Carey.)..."
Federal regulations

Independence of Federal Financial Regulators

"Conventional wisdom regarding regulators is that the structure and design of the organization

matters for policy outcomes. Financial regulators conduct rulemaking and enforcement to

implement law and supervise financial institutions. These agencies have been given certain

characteristics that enhance their day-to-day independence from the President or Congress, which

may make policymaking more technical and less “political” or “partisan,” for better or worse.

Independence may also make regulators less accountable to elected officials and can reduce

congressional influence, at least in the short term.."Federal Financial Regulators

A Simpler, Smarter Regulatory System
"The President outlined his plan to create a 21st-century regulatory system, calling for an unprecedented government-wide review to eliminate tens of millions of hours in annual red-tape, and billions of dollars in regulatory costs while protecting the health and safety of the American people."

Insurance Regulation: Issues, Background, and Legislation in the 111th Congress
"The individual states have been acknowledged as the primary regulators of insurance as far back as 1868. Since the 1945 McCarran-Ferguson Act, this system has operated with the specific blessing of Congress, but has also been subject to periodic scrutiny and suggestions that the time may have come for Congress to take back the regulatory authority that it granted to the states. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, congressional scrutiny was largely driven by the increasing complexities of the insurance business and concern over whether the states were up to the task of ensuring consumer protections, particularly insurer solvency. Prior to the recent financial crisis, congressional interest in insurance regulation focused on the inefficiencies in the state regulatory system. A major catalyst for congressional interest has been the aftermath of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA), which modernized the regulatory structure for banks and securities firms, but left the insurance sector largely untouched. Many larger insurers, and their trade associations, had previously defended state regulation but consider themselves at a competitive disadvantage in the current regulatory structure. They are now largely arguing for an optional federal charter akin to that available to banks..."

eRulemaking Enhances Regulations.gov for Access to Federal Regulations
"The eRulemaking Program has launched a significant upgrade to the Web site that provides one-stop, public access to information related to current and forthcoming regulations issued by the federal government. Enhancements to regulations.gov include improved search capabilities, new navigation tools, and easier access to areas for the public to provide comments on proposed regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency is the managing partner of the inter-agency eRulemaking Program, which operates regulations.gov.

Visitors to regulations.gov can now streamline search results with date ranges, select specific U.S. government departments or agencies, and view results by docket or file folder. Other changes include interactive icons and links to common user tasks that pre-populate search fields to help users find regulations and comments. The Web site also provides quick access, simplified navigation and additional information sharing, such as social bookmarking and RSS feeds by specific government departments or agencies..."

The Unified Agenda
"The Unified Agenda (also known as the Semiannual Regulatory Agenda), published twice a year (usually in April and October) in the Federal Register (FR), summarizes the rules and proposed rules that each Federal agency expects to issue during the next year. It is published by the Office of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)."

Draft. 2008 REPORT TO CONGRESS ON THE BENEFITS AND COSTS OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS AND
UNFUNDED MANDATES ON STATE, LOCAL, AND TRIBAL ENTITIES
"This Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations (Report) was prepared to implement Section 624 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 (Pub. L. No. 106-554, 31 U.S.C. § 1105 note), commonly known as the “Regulatory Right-to-Know Act.” This is the eleventh annual Report since the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) began issuing this Report in 1997."

2007 Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations and Unfunded Mandates
"This Report to Congress on the Benefits and Costs of Federal Regulations (Report) was prepared to implement Section 624 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 2001 (Pub. L. No. 106-554, 31 U.S.C. § 1105 note), commonly known as the “Regulatory Right-to-Know Act.” This is the tenth annual Report since the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) began issuing this Report in 1997.

A key feature of this Report is the estimates of the total benefits and costs of regulations reviewed by OMB. Similar to previous Reports, the Report includes a ten-year look-back of major Federal regulations reviewed by OMB to examine their quantified and monetized benefits and costs.."