Any review of regs will require a comprehensive understanding of their broader context.
The Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force, just launched by the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, aims to identify and eliminate laws and regulations that harm competition across various sectors, starting with transportation, food and agriculture, healthcare, and energy.
The Division will push to eradicate anticompetitive laws and regulations by, among other things, reviewing existing regulations, filing amicus briefs, and commenting on proposed legislation. The public has 60 days to submit comments on the impact of these regulations.
Certainly, pro-competition initiatives are welcomed by capitalists everywhere, but the details and execution of such an effort, given complex market dynamics, the web-like regulatory landscape, and the many years of court precedents, will play important roles in how this initiative unfolds.
One concern is the regulatory capture aspect of this campaign. Will the entities intended to be regulated gain undue influence over the agencies responsible for overseeing them? This could result in regulations that favor large, established businesses at the expense of smaller competitors and startups, ultimately stifling innovation and competition – the opposite of the Task Force’s stated goal.
Although the Antitrust Division properly invites public comments, disproportionate influence from well-funded interest groups could skew the outcomes, leading to decisions that do not reflect the broader public interest.
The influence of powerful groups is nothing new in Washington, but little gets the attention of American businesses more than the tightening or loosening of reins on competitive conduct. Generally speaking, businesses have long lamented federal and state regulations as overly broad impediments imposed on companies by what they view as overreaching agencies.
To be sure, these regulations are complex, overlapping, and interdependent, but any changes should be made with a careful approach, like removing blocks from a Jenga tower with thumb and forefinger and not a baseball bat. Simplifying or eliminating certain regs without a comprehensive understanding of their broader context presents significant risks. Gaps in consumer protection or environmental safeguards could open wide. Rapid deregulation could also cause economic disruption, particularly in industries heavily reliant on existing regulatory frameworks.
The new head of the Antitrust Division, Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater, announced the formation of the Task Force saying that “realizing President Trump’s economic Golden Age will require unwinding burdensome regulations that stifle free market competition.” Under her leadership, she said the Antitrust Division will “stand against harmful barriers to competition whether imposed by public regulators or private monopolists.”
In making the announcement, the Assistant Attorney General said her effort follows President Trump’s Executive Order 14192 and Executive Order 14219 directing agencies to eliminate unnecessary and burdensome regulations.
This will be one comment period that businesses not at the top of the food chain and consumer advocacy groups will want to monitor closely.