Posted on 02/07/2025 4:58:55 PM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act in the Senate on Thursday.
His bill intended to take action to “put power back in the people’s hands instead of the administrative state,” read a press release about the bill. This specifically applies to the current process involving legislation in the government in which regulations go into effect unless explicitly disapproved by Congress. Under Paul’s proposal in the REINS Act, major rules would need to be approved by the legislative branch before going to the president for signature and approval.
“The purpose of this Act is to increase accountability for and transparency in the Federal regulatory process,” read the text of the bill. “Section 1 of article I of the Constitution of the United States grants all legislative powers to Congress.”
Additionally, Paul’s REINS Act highlighted a recent history of a reduction in oversight and accountability in legislation that is passed by Congress.
“Over time, Congress has excessively delegated its constitutional charge while failing to conduct appropriate oversight and retain accountability for the content of the laws it passes,” read the bill. “By requiring a vote in Congress, this Act will result in more carefully drafted and detailed legislation, an improved regulatory process, and a legislative branch that is truly accountable to the American people for the laws imposed upon them.”......
Multiple Senate Republicans joined Paul in cosponsoring the bill, including Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Katie Britt (R-AL), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), James Lankford (R-OK), Mike Lee (R-UT), Rick Scott (R-FL), and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), among others.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Seems like this should be a bipartisan bill, but then the rats are all about their power, not about what's best for US Citizens.
How about transparency in Congress. I would like to see the enactment of bills opened up and see who is putting the BS in them. The next budget process should be interesting. I read an article where Trump is putting his input into it.
Supreme Court 9, Administrative State 0
On April 14, 2023, the Supreme Court struck a blow supporting our Constitution and individual liberties. Beginning in the late nineteenth century, citizens began losing many freedoms through administrative edicts. Appeals of these regulations had to be made to courts within an agency, which has already found the people guilty. Such power harks back to discretions of English kings unrestrained by Parliament found in such places as King’s Council and the Star Chamber.
The Supreme Court acted to reassert the jurisdiction of district and circuit courts and the legislature as established by the Constitution. All power was to reside there, so Americans could avoid the sad experience of English citizens. Justice Kagan delivered the unanimous opinion of the court saying, “One respondent attacks as well the combination of prosecutorial and adjudicatory functions in a single agency….They maintain in essence that the agencies as currently structured, are unconstitutional in much of their work”.
You and I could relate too many examples of people’s frustrating experiences facing government bureaucrats. Their sufferings cause me to reflect on a passage where Fredrick Douglass describes overseer duties. I only substituted for the words slave, overseer, and master.
“No matter how innocent a citizen might be it availed him nothing when accused by the bureaucrat of any violation of a regulation. To be accused was to be convicted and to be convicted was to be punished….To escape punishment was to escape accusation….few citizens had the fortune to do either under the overseership of the agency.”
Supreme Court 9, Administrative State 0
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4145682/posts The History and Danger of Administrative Law
https://constitutionclub.wordpress.com/2014/10/01/the-history-and-danger-of-administrative-law/
When will it dawn on them that it has been THEIR job to oversee these agencies and ensure the taxpayers money they gave them wasn’t being wasted?
And some of them have the audacity to say Elon is a. dummy?
That is one place I very much join Libertarians like Rand Paul.
If I were him “my’ REINS act would go further. I would require any new (ANY!!!!) must go to Congress as nothing more than a PROPOSAL, a proposal that has to first go through, and passed out of, House and Senate committees relavant to the matter to be regulated, and if voted out of the committees, then required to be passed by both the House and the Senate as standalone votes approving the “regulation”.
Additionally, I would remove all independent enforcement ability from regulatory agencies, requiring enforcement only by the regulatpory agency seeking and obtaining the DOJ agreement to pursue enforcement via a suit, by the DOJ, in which no action is taken until a court trial and a court’s determination that an enforcement action is justified, and the DOJ would have limits on how long it can pursue a case without an end to it, denying the DOJ the ability to financially overwhelm defendents into submission and settlement. The DOJ has to win or lose its cases. It cannot “settle them”.
Additionally, as another check against the regulatory state, an out of control DOJ, and trial lawyers making frivolous lawsuits, I’d change the American judicial system to “loser pays” rules - you (including the government) lose a case, you pay the winner’s legal costs.
Congress will never vote for this. It would mean that they actually have to work.
It’s important that draining the swamp ultimately cannot be a one man show. Because it has to stick after Trump is gone. Otherwise he’s just a speed bump on the road to Hell.
Making sure this doesnt go back to the same old same old
“Congress will never vote for this. It would mean that they actually have to work.”
Good point.
The bill is clearly unconstitutional.
Making Congress work hard for the American people (instead of lobbyists) is cruel and unusual punishment.
Lol.
Every elected official should be audited every year.
Jimmah Carter introduced an idea of zero based budgeting.
It was a policy that programs had to be reviewed and then renewed every on a yearly basis.
Today any program that is passed becomes a “zombie” program and can never be cut and just keeps going and going.
I don’t necessarily have a problem with Paul’s legislation.
But the BIGGEST problem congress has is a budget.
They do not even go through the motions any more.
The chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee used to be the most powerful person on Capitol Hill.
It made crooks like Wilbur Mills and Danny Rostenkowski infamous.
But I would propose that the funding process is way more corrupt today than then.
Everything is just thrown in willy nilly to a continuing resolution.
After it passes we are supposed to believed it was “bi-partisan” and each so-called opposition party tell its supporters it was the “best” they could do.
A bi-partisan continuing resolution is nothing more that a uniparty big gubmint bill.
And ALL these resolutions get passed because the Uniparty’s greatest card is the fear card of a gubmint shutdown.
That’s the ONLY reason I support Trump’s call for eliminating the debt ceiling.
Congress has been corrupt since George Washington was POTUS.
But when they found the fear of a gubmint shutdown, corruption has NEVER been easier and NEVER been bigger.
If Trump keeps cleaning house, then I would recommend Jimmah Carter’s prescription which was zero based budgeting.
Programs have a STATED shelf life and expiration date and they must be reconsidered and passed again after a stated time period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.