Promoted from the Ricochet Member Feed by Editors Created with Sketch. Jeb Bush Vows to Slash the Regulatory State. Nicely. Sort of.

 
shutterstock_296439881
Rich Koele / Shutterstock.com

Jeb Bush is back in the Wall Street Journal’s opinion pages this morning, explaining “How I’ll Slash the Regulation Tax.” Similar to his tax plan, there’s both rhetoric here to warm a conservative’s heart — whatever that means — and details that demonstrate how Bush simply doesn’t get the the expectations of the right wing of what should be his base (disclosure: I am a card-carrying member of the far right wing of what should be his base).

Bush starts by quoting important statistics from various think tanks and agencies: the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s 2015 finding that the federal regulation imposes a $1.88T silent tax on the economy each year ($15,000 for each American family) and the World Bank’s ranking of the United States’ 46th in terms of ease starting a business. He then does a very nice job characterizing the crony capitalist nature of the regulatory state:

These rules create a moat around America’s wealthiest and well-connected. They can afford to comply and absorb the costs. The burden of meeting the new rules’ requirements falls heaviest on everyone else though higher prices. And if a business can’t pass on the cost of the new rules to consumers, it just cuts wages or jobs.

This is sound reasoning and Bush deserves props for recognizing how the regulatory state helps his primary donor base to the detriment of others.

But he then makes some wild assertions about how his reforms will add three percentage points to our GDP by 2025. Combine that with Paul Ryan’s pie-in-the-sky 4%+ growth projections and all problems can (apparently) be solved while figuring out how to service national debt in excess of GDP.

So what isn’t to like? Bush’s prescription for dealing with the problem:

My administration will create a commission charged with reviewing regulations from the perspective of the regulated and shifting more power from Congress back to the states.

The solution for too much government is … more government. Quick, round up a commission! At least he hasn’t called it a blue ribbon panel yet. The quote above demonstrates Bush’s lack of understanding of the problem. It isn’t that Congress has too much power that should be devolved to the states; it’s that Congress has abdicated its responsibilities to the executive, in the form of agencies not accountable to voters or those they seek to regulate. Sen. Mike Lee does a great job summarizing this in his latest book.

Then, finally, Bush confirms what we already know about his brand of conservatism:

In my administration, every regulation, including those issued by the so-called independent agencies such as the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau [CFPB] will have to satisfy a rigorous White House review process, including cost benefit analysis.

This sums up his position nicely. The CFPB — a brain child of Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama — will have to submit its regulatory proposals to a White House commission for cost/benefit analysis. Sigh. The problem in America isn’t the lack of oversight over the CFPB and similar agencies, or that their regulations don’t pass review; the problem in America is that these agencies exist at all.

Bush confirms what the base has long suspected the Republican donor class strategy to be:

  1. The Democrats will build it. Warren/Obama CFPB, etc.
  2. The Republicans will fund it. We can’t possibly not raise the debt ceiling (insert wailing and gnashing of teeth). We must borrow from our children’s future to fund that which democrats have built.
  3. Republicans will subsequently ride to the rescue of the program. We will create a commission (more government) to manage the regulatory, bureaucracy, and welfare state better than the Democrats who created it, but will never repeal or eliminate anything.

Jeb Bush is a bright man of high integrity who just does not get it.

There are 85 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Ultron Will Inject You Now Coolidge
    Ultron Will Inject You Now Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    The house is on fire so we’ve established a commission to analyze the most effective chemical fire extinguisher. The commission will deliver its report *after* the house has burned down.

    • #1
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:03 AM PDT
    • Like
  2. The Reticulator Member

    If he wants to cut regulations he needs to help cut the budgets of regulatory agencies now. And that means providing support to the GOP on holding firm on the debt ceiling.

    • #2
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:32 AM PDT
    • Like
  3. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    The Reticulator:If he wants to cut regulations he needs to help cut the budgets of regulatory agencies now. And that means providing support to the GOP on holding firm on the debt ceiling.

    I endorse this strategy. Great suggestion. Please don’t hold your breath.

    • #3
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  4. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Pseudodionysius:The house is on fire so we’ve established a commission to analyze the most effective chemical fire extinguisher. The commission will deliver its report *after* the house has burned down.

    Exactly.

    • #4
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:34 AM PDT
    • Like
  5. Guruforhire Member

    • #5
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:39 AM PDT
    • Like
  6. Ball Diamond Ball Inactive

    Same thing with ObamaCare. It will never be defunded or repealed.

    • #6
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:54 AM PDT
    • Like
  7. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Ball Diamond Ball:Same thing with ObamaCare.It will never be defunded or repealed.

    I hope you are wrong, but to date have seen no credible evidence outside of Ted Cruz’s protestations that you are incorrect.

    • #7
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  8. Ultron Will Inject You Now Coolidge
    Ultron Will Inject You Now Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Managing Toward Gommorah

    • #8
    • September 23, 2015, at 5:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  9. DrewInWisconsin, Negative Infl… Coolidge

    Pseudodionysius:Managing Toward Gommorah

    That’s brilliant. Thank you.

    • #9
    • September 23, 2015, at 6:30 AM PDT
    • Like
  10. Ball Diamond Ball Inactive

    Pseudodionysius:Managing Toward Gomorrah

    Little Orphan Boehner:

    Gomorrah! Gomorrah! I love ya Gomorrah!

    You’re only a day away!

    • #10
    • September 23, 2015, at 6:48 AM PDT
    • Like
  11. I Walton Member

    No threat to his donors here. Wow, that must have been scary to them.

    • #11
    • September 23, 2015, at 7:01 AM PDT
    • Like
  12. jetstream Inactive

    With little resources to recover, we are trapped in the real world version of Kevin Costner’s movie, No Way Out. There is no heading to get us out of this.

    • #12
    • September 23, 2015, at 7:22 AM PDT
    • Like
  13. Z in MT Inactive

    Brent,

    Thanks for the post. Glad you came back.

    For me regulatory reform is one of the most important issues.

    • #13
    • September 23, 2015, at 7:48 AM PDT
    • Like
  14. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Z in MT:Brent,

    Thanks for the post. Glad you came back.

    For me regulatory reform is one of the most important issues.

    Thank you very much Z. Good to be back.

    I agree this is very important. We have allowed our system of checks and balances to be corrupted through the federal regulatory machine. There is such an opportunity here and we get unserious proposals from the supposed frontrunner this cycle. Very disheartening.

    • #14
    • September 23, 2015, at 7:50 AM PDT
    • Like
  15. Ultron Will Inject You Now Coolidge
    Ultron Will Inject You Now Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    DrewInWisconsin:

    Pseudodionysius:Managing Toward Gommorah

    That’s brilliant. Thank you.

    It will cost you. I take payment in Hannity appearances wearing a black cloak and voice altering software.

    • #15
    • September 23, 2015, at 7:55 AM PDT
    • Like
  16. Ultron Will Inject You Now Coolidge
    Ultron Will Inject You Now Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    jetstream:With little resources to recover, we are trapped in the real world version of Kevin Costner’s movie, No Way Out. There is no heading to get us out of this.

    And he turned out to be Putin with hair.

    • #16
    • September 23, 2015, at 8:24 AM PDT
    • Like
  17. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Jeb! is the man Hayek warned you about.

    • #17
    • September 23, 2015, at 8:31 AM PDT
    • Like
  18. The (apathetic) King Prawn Member

    Regulation to ameliorate the supposedly negative effects of competition among businesses becomes just one more area in which businesses compete, only in this arena they compete not to provide the best products and services but to extract the most from politics.

    • #18
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:02 AM PDT
    • Like
  19. Franco Member
    Franco Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    He lost me at the “my administration” part.

    • #19
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:16 AM PDT
    • Like
  20. MarciN Member

    BrentB67: Quoting from Bush’s op-ed: “These rules create a moat around America’s wealthiest and well-connected. They can afford to comply and absorb the costs. The burden of meeting the new rules’ requirements falls heaviest on everyone else though higher prices. And if a business can’t pass on the cost of the new rules to consumers, it just cuts wages or jobs.”

    This is the most accurate problem statement I’ve read on this subject in years.

    As you do, BrentB67, I have to give Bush a lot of credit here.

    Sometimes identifying the problem is nine-tenths of the work of finding the solution.

    If a leader were to put that statement on a chalkboard somewhere, creative people could address it effectively.

    One of these days, I’d love to put together a book of wise and accurate statements that come out of the stress and self-examination that arises from our presidential campaigns. These insights seem to get lost the minute the race is over.

    They should not.

    No matter who wins, this is what we all need to work on for the future.

    • #20
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:33 AM PDT
    • Like
  21. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    MarciN:

    BrentB67: Quoting from Bush’s op-ed: “These rules create a moat around America’s wealthiest and well-connected. They can afford to comply and absorb the costs. The burden of meeting the new rules’ requirements falls heaviest on everyone else though higher prices. And if a business can’t pass on the cost of the new rules to consumers, it just cuts wages or jobs.”

    This is the most accurate problem statement I’ve read on this subject in years.

    As you do, BrentB67, I have to give Bush a lot of credit here.

    Sometimes identifying the problem is nine-tenths of the work of finding the solution.

    If a leader were to put that statement on a chalkboard somewhere, creative people could address it effectively.

    One of these days, I’d love to put together a book of wise and accurate statements that come out of the stress and self-examination that arises from our presidential campaigns. These insights seem to get lost the minute the race is over.

    They should not.

    No matter who wins, this is what we all need to work on for the future.

    Marci, I agree. The first step in the solution is recognizing the need for one. Jeb is an honorable man and this quote is testament. However, his ‘solution’ is anything but and why he is challenged to reconcile those that are funding Right to Rise PAC with the base he desperately needs to earn the nomination.

    • #21
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:37 AM PDT
    • Like
  22. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    MarciN: This is the most accurate problem statement I’ve read on this subject in years.

    It is accurate but it’s hardly original. Very similar statements abound. You’re probably right that they will be forgotten once the anointed one takes up residence at 1600. The trouble with Mr Bush is that he doesn’t really understand the meaning of the words he wrote. He might even have gotten them from someone else.

    • #22
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:40 AM PDT
    • Like
  23. The (apathetic) King Prawn Member

    MarciN: Sometimes identifying the problem is nine-tenths of the work of finding the solution.

    The only reason our politicians peddle so much influence is because they can. Our founders were wise to the game and created a government of limited, enumerated powers to prevent exactly this outcome. We got here anyway because our government no longer operates within the boundaries provided. Every branch of government is guilty of running roughshod over its allowed authority. Some would say this abuse of their authority takes the government outside the bounds of legitimacy.

    Of course, we elected them and keep reelecting them at absurd rates.

    • #23
    • September 23, 2015, at 9:42 AM PDT
    • Like
  24. Neil Hansen (Klaatu) Inactive

    FWIW, the CFPB is not funded through congressional appropriation but rather the Federal Reserve. I believe there is a suit working its way through the courts regarding this but it doesn’t change the fact it cannot be defunded through the normal appropriations process.

    Also, I’m not sure i understand your objection to turning control back to the states. If the problem is Congress has given power to regulatory agencies, stripping Congress of the power resolves the problem.

    • #24
    • September 23, 2015, at 10:42 AM PDT
    • Like
  25. livingtheLoneStarlife Inactive

    BrentB67: The CFPB — a brain child of Elizabeth Warren and Barack Obama — will have to submit its regulatory proposals to a White House commission for cost/benefit analysis.

    Right. Bureaucrats get to review bureaucracy and decide that it is good.

    This is a proposal designed by and for Kampaign Konsultants. It’s largely useless in the real world.

    • #25
    • September 23, 2015, at 10:55 AM PDT
    • Like
  26. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Klaatu:FWIW, the CFPB is not funded through congressional appropriation but rather the Federal Reserve. I believe there is a suit working its way through the courts regarding this but it doesn’t change the fact it cannot be defunded through the normal appropriations process.

    Also, I’m not sure i understand your objection to turning control back to the states. If the problem is Congress has given power to regulatory agencies, stripping Congress of the power resolves the problem.

    Thanks for the info on CFPB funding.

    Congress is empowered to enact laws. They have outsourced a good part of that to the executive branch regulatory state. This sets up our representatives ability to say it isn’t their fault when these agencies go rogue.

    This is a case where I am advocating Congress retaking its power, responsibility, and accountability. Congress has mostly given up passing laws and instead issues guidance, at best, to bureaucrats. A good example is insider trading, there is no law against it because Congress doesn’t want to be subject to it so the SEC is left to enforce whatever it is in an arbitrary manner. The tax code is another example.

    To your point regrading federalism I agree that moving government closer to the states is important, but the federal is empowered to do certain things and Congress has found a way to outsource those.

    • #26
    • September 23, 2015, at 10:56 AM PDT
    • Like
  27. Neil Hansen (Klaatu) Inactive

    BrentB67:

    Klaatu:FWIW, the CFPB is not funded through congressional appropriation but rather the Federal Reserve. I believe there is a suit working its way through the courts regarding this but it doesn’t change the fact it cannot be defunded through the normal appropriations process.

    Also, I’m not sure i understand your objection to turning control back to the states. If the problem is Congress has given power to regulatory agencies, stripping Congress of the power resolves the problem.

    Thanks for the info on CFPB funding.

    Congress is empowered to enact laws. They have outsourced a good part of that to the executive branch regulatory state. This sets up our representatives ability to say it isn’t their fault when these agencies go rogue.

    This is a case where I am advocating Congress retaking its power, responsibility, and accountability. Congress has mostly given up passing laws and instead issues guidance, at best, to bureaucrats. A good example is insider trading, there is no law against it because Congress doesn’t want to be subject to it so the SEC is left to enforce whatever it is in an arbitrary manner. The tax code is another example.

    To your point regrading federalism I agree that moving government closer to the states is important, but the federal is empowered to do certain things and Congress has found a way to outsource those.

    If we are speaking of an actual enumerated power, I agree Congress should take back direct control. Other functions I would happily see returned to the states.

    • #27
    • September 23, 2015, at 10:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  28. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Klaatu:

    BrentB67:

    Klaatu:…

    Also, I’m not sure i understand your objection to turning control back to the states. If the problem is Congress has given power to regulatory agencies, stripping Congress of the power resolves the problem.

    Thanks for the info on CFPB funding.

    Congress is empowered to enact laws. They have outsourced a good part of that to the executive branch regulatory state. This sets up our representatives ability to say it isn’t their fault when these agencies go rogue.

    This is a case where I am advocating Congress retaking its power, responsibility, and accountability. Congress has mostly given up passing laws and instead issues guidance, at best, to bureaucrats. A good example is insider trading, there is no law against it because Congress doesn’t want to be subject to it so the SEC is left to enforce whatever it is in an arbitrary manner. The tax code is another example.

    To your point regrading federalism I agree that moving government closer to the states is important, but the federal is empowered to do certain things and Congress has found a way to outsource those.

    If we are speaking of an actual enumerated power, I agree Congress should take back direct control. Other functions I would happily see returned to the states.

    We are in agreement.

    • #28
    • September 23, 2015, at 10:59 AM PDT
    • Like
  29. Barfly Member

    BrentB67:

    Jeb Bush is a bright man of high integrity who just does not get it.

    Yes, a bright man of high integrity who lacks only that last little IQ point that’d tell him his policy is one of immoral statism, that benefits him and his class at the expense of the nation. Got it.

    • #29
    • September 23, 2015, at 11:06 AM PDT
    • Like
  30. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67

    Barfly:

    BrentB67:

    Jeb Bush is a bright man of high integrity who just does not get it.

    Yes, a bright man of high integrity who lacks only that last little IQ point that’d tell him his policy is one of immoral statism, that benefits him and his class at the expense of the nation. Got it.

    I think it runs in the family.

    • #30
    • September 23, 2015, at 11:07 AM PDT
    • Like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.