Trump banishing Obama's memos, regulations

WASHINGTON – Under the Obama administration, the White House, the Department of Justice and other federal agencies repeatedly circumvented Congress by using guidance memos to create de facto regulations, changing laws without going through the review process.

In less than a year, however, the Trump administration has dramatically scaled back government overreach, Merrill Matthews, a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation, told WND.

“Guidance typically from the department means there is some question about how to do this, because of the way it was ambiguously written, so a federal agency would provide guidance. But the Obama administration, actually, greatly overstepped those limits in clarifying things to in essence create new law,” Matthews explained.

“The Trump administration is doing better than Ronald Reagan on reducing the flow of regulation,” he said, citing the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Obama ended his presidency with a record-shattering regulatory rulebook. The Federal Register topped off at 97,110 pages, an all-time high, with 18 regulations added for every new law .

While regulations and Federal Register pages, where agency rules and regulations are published, dropped more than one-third under President Reagan over several years, CEI notes, the Trump administration cut the number of pages in the Federal Register 32 percent in the first nine months of this year.

The Trump administration has saved $560 million by cutting  regulations, according to American Action Forum.

When Trump ran for president, he promised to slash as many as 80 percent of all federal regulations, and he is on his way to fulfilling that promise.

In a memo released Friday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions explained that the Department of Justice will no longer used guidance documents to amend current law, cement new regulatory requirements or create new rights or obligations beyond what is prescribed by law, as Obama’s Justice Department did.

“Simply sending a letter” to “make new rules” is unconstitutional, he noted.

“It has come to my attention that the department has in the past published guidance documents – or similar instruments of future effect by other names, such as letters to regulated entities – that effectively bind private parties without undergoing the rule-making process,” the memo states.

“Effective immediately, department components may not issue guidance documents that purport to create rights or obligations binding on persons or entities outside the executive branch (including state, local and tribal governments.) To avoid circumventing the rule-making process, department components should adhere to the following principles when issuing guidance documents.”

Sessions also said Friday that the department is ending “regulation-by-litigation.”

“The days of ‘sue and settle’ – when special interests could sue an agency, then get the agency to impose a new regulation in a settlement, often to advance an agenda – are over,” he said. “The Department of Justice is duty-bound to defend laws as they are written, regardless of whether or not the government likes the results. Our agencies must follow the law – not make it.”

A Regulatory Reform Task Force, led by Associate Attorney General Rachel Brand, will also review existing DOJ documents to see if they need to be rescinded or modified.

The guidance documents and regulations Obama issued during the final months of his presidency had far-reaching implications for the coal industry, broadband customers, hunters, women seeking abortion at Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers, and the firearms industry.

The school bathroom mandate was one of the most controversial guidance memos Obama issued. With the help of then-attorney general Loretta Lynch, he instructed public schools that receive federal funding to allow transgender students to use the bathroom of their choice

Matthews pointed out the Civil Rights law of 1964 “states you cannot discriminate based upon race, creed, origin, religion and gender.”

“[What] the Obama administration did was expand that to gay people and transgender,” he said. “That was not covered under the civil rights legislation.”

He said Sessions is “scaling back guidance and restoring it to depend on what is actually legislated.”

https://www.wnd.com/2017/11/trump-banishing-obamas-memos-regulations/

More deregulating this time around. 

The small victory for showerheads this week, President Donald Trump’s executive order “undoing the left’s war on water pressure,” was a big victory for personal freedom.

Trump’s order rescinds the “overly complicated federal rule” that redefined the word “showerhead” and restricted the water flow of certain appliances under Obama and Biden. As the White House noted, this change was a part of the former presidents’ “radical green agenda” that “made life worse for everyday Americans.” This restriction on showerheads was first enacted by the Obama administration in 2013. Trump worked to lift the regulations during his first term, but Biden reversed these efforts.

Regulations often creep into our lives through the quiet lobbying of special interest groups. They seek administrative changes, circumventing congressional review. As part of the regulation process, a government agency proposes a rule, which is then opened up to public comment. But, very often, public comments are dominated by special interest groups with little input from normal Americans and are not a fair assessment of public opinion.

For example, in July of 2021, a sub-agency of Biden’s Department of Energy proposed a rule to reinstate the Obama-era definition of “showerhead.” The proposed rule was open to public comment until September 2021.

Of the 331.9 million people in the United States in 2021, records show only 20 documented comments. This total includes several letters from various interest groups, like Plumbing Manufacturers International, expressing support for the rule.

A few of the comments were from individuals expressing disagreement with the Energy Department’s proposed change, but the broader showering public was likely oblivious to the pending regulation. That is how regulators like it. They don’t truly want to hear from us.

Overregulation goes way beyond showerheads. As the White House explained this week, it “chokes the American economy, entrenches bureaucrats, and stifles personal freedom.” Gas stove and water heater bans, washing machines and dishwashers that won’t get the job done, furnace mandates, low-flow toilets that barely flush — a long list of intrusions lower quality of life and quietly make government bigger.

As Trump works to kill harmful regulations, Congress should codify common sense into law to prevent them from popping up again. The process must be reformed to prevent bureaucrats from making dumb rules with no real public participation.  

@Raiders22

 Not sure this logic is comprehensive or accurate. The items you mentioned are not extreme with modifications and adjustments just like in the past the initial changes to things like seat belts or asbestos paint or lead pipe plumbing or a cat converter on a car and a slew of other things when the changes were made it was met with similar skepticism just as you are in that reply.

There are some areas where water is scarce like where I live and having regulated water or flow restriction is meant for conservation and also to save money for the consumer via less consumption and less use fees. My house was built 15 years ago and code is to install a water pressure gauge at the main, it sets water pressure at a non-adjustable rate and is done for a variety of reasons, same goes for the plastic piece in shower heads (which anyone with a little sense can remove very very easily) and same goes for things like monoxide poison sensors. 

I dont get the rage that some groups associate with regulation and lump most things into political complaining when in most every instance there is reasoning behind it. This voodoo complex conspiracy theory ranting that many do just lacks reality and logic.

@wallstreetcappers

 Extreme enough that people go out of their way to avoid buying those products. 
People did not like cars over horse and buggy right away.  But innovation showed them to be better and more efficient to use.  
I know several people that do not like the new washers, for example.  
I always tell them they will just have to do more, smaller loads. Of course that takes more time. 
 For sure, a lot of folks do not government intrusion into everything.  

I am not sure if using safety innovations is a good enough comparison with something that is supposedly for the ‘good’ of the environment.

Like the guys said, so now it takes far longer to take a shower and you use even more water. 
Some people like to fight to stand up in the shower and get in and get out — not spend all day in a drip-drip place like they are out hiking on the trail.  
I get that people are also averse to change.  You cannot out-argue safety.  
But if innovations like EVs and solar and wind are really that good — let them stand on their own two feet.  
But implementing regulations on appliances just for a ‘save the environment’ agenda takes more than just doing regulations to get folk’s acceptance. 
If it worked as well and lowers the bill and saves time — the folks will buy the new ones. But when it does not save money, water, time, or have some improvement in efficiency — the folks see it as overreach by lobbyists.  

I wash my clothes on Bedding Cycle, have to otherwise some items don't even get wet. 

You do a load of laundry, take a shower, flush a toilet, most all of the water is removed and ends up draining to a Wastewater Plant or septic tank where it is filtered and returned to the environment.

@Raiders22

 I think people actively seek reasons to make political grandstanding generalizations even when it is not true or it is exaggerated. 

I have those lower flow settings on my shower AND I have a code restricted water flow from the city and yet I do not exaggerate the condition in the way you described aboe about trickle, if someone has a trickle even with a flow restrictor there is an issue with the plumbing, it is not only about the settings on the shower head. In my case I just opened the part and removed the plastic restrictor and that was all it took. I still have the main water restriction and the shower is not blasting but I am not looking to cry politics when there is something that is not 100% selfish to my preferences.

@wallstreetcappers

 You had to take it apart and fix it.

Why not simply have one for sale that you liked.

if the reason they are not available is solely politics (or agenda-driven), I think it is okay to ‘cry’ politics.  It is what it is.  Both can be true. 

@Raiders22

It was and is exaggerated that is the point and it is done for partisan complaining and it is misguided and inaccurate.

I guess I could really take it to the next level and hire a plumber to remove my code enforced water control restrictor at the main then come onto social media and shake my fist at the democrats (even though code here is in a highly GOP centrist state) that would generate a high level of satisfaction...lol

I existed with the flow restrictor on the unit for 7 years and I survived, who would have thought it? The issue came about where a fixture on the very end of the house furthest from the main was being used and the flow seemed lesser than the unit closer to the supply, so instead of hitting my usual GOP social media to blame the dems I decided to see if there is anything I could do given the problem was MINE not some politician and I discovered (as anyone can) that the removal of the flow restrictor takes like 30 seconds so i did it.

Fun how people can find solutions on their own without attention seeking social media political exaggeration and whining. The trickle comment is the most amusing, unless someone either is on a septic system OR has wrecked plumbing there is ZERO chance the scenario you described would ever happen...never a possibility.

@wallstreetcappers

 It is not just about ‘surviving’.  People survived without electricity.  
There are many things the folks want to do that are in a sense going backwards.  
It really is not exaggeration when that is simply what it is.  
 
Why impose and restrict things for a ‘cause’.  There are folks that just do not want folks to eat meat.  There are folks that want to reduce the amount of folks living on the planet.  
So should they just eat vegetables and not complain and only have one child.  Just because some ‘expert’ thinks it is best.  

The appliances and the things of that sort are simply extensions or precursors of this sort of thing.  Most of it is not really fact based.  Even the ones that have some validity are not worth ‘forcing’ them on folks without giving them the choice.  
It should be about improvements and innovations standing on their own.  If big things (EVs, wind, solar) worked so well — they would take over through improvement.

The same thing with small things.  If the ‘forced’ appliances were a great improvement they would be the only ones in demand — they are not.  At least not yet. 
When something is forced on the folks for an agenda, it is bad thinking to me to just say do not whine about it and accept it.  Just because some he thinks they know better what it better for you and the environment. 

What about the folks who live where there is plenty of water, or they have a well and their own source.   Why should their options be limited.  It simply falls apart logically. 
Let the ‘improved’ product prove itself and people will buy it. 

@THEMUGG

 Oh, they’re doing something alright. 

The National archives keeps all records involving white house cabinet offices congress that are submitted by paper in a vault. Even the JFK classified files were held securely for over 60 years in this facility

 Military records have two locations the pentagon and ST Louis MO 

 AS FAR AS I KNOW This is never burned scrapped destroyed removed or tampered with. With the exception of editing a record is copied sent to an intelligence service which blacks out areas of national security the original is held in vaults.

The bottom line no such thing as a memo banishment was it written it was sent and stored. As far of what is accessible information and allowed to be released that the discretion of the intelligence service.

@Raiders22

 Survived was sarcasm of the exaggeration you are forwarding. Also your examples of restriction was already addressed, down here there is a water deficit due to the population so these sort of upgrades actually support the local communities by making it less dependent on water import and it also lowers the cost of use and cost to the municipalities. The point was and is that these fixtures are not anything of a hardship or hassle as you are describing unless you are on a septic and the pressure is way below say 70psi OR your plumbing is messed up. The parts are engineered for specs that are well within reasonable use and purpose. 

My house code restriction on the main was and is 75psi, the device I have on my water line coming into the house is unable to go over 75psi, then I had these showerheads on in addition and it was not unreasonable it was not a trickle it was nothing terrible, even to the furthest fixture from the supply, the longest and last line that was the one I adjusted but it was not a trickle. Your exaggerations are just unsupported by logic and engineering. If someone has a trickle with a flow restrictor the issue is not the showerhead it is some crap in the lines or the lack of upkeep for mineral buildup. 

@wallstreetcappers

 Yessir.  I get all of that.  
But again, we are not talking about just your area.  Plenty of areas have access to a lot of water.  Why can’t they have whatever showerhead or washer they want.  Why does the government regulate what they can buy. 
It is also NOT just about the shower heads.

Take it a few steps further in extreme.  What if the water gets less abundant or more people move there. 

Then one day they say you will only have water on odd or even days by address, or some such.  
Do you just say that it is not that big of a hardship.  

 
It is NOT just about showerheads, or even appliances that are regulated.  
This is about the overreach of government into all areas of life and often based on flimsy or no evidence that it is good or worth forcing onto people. 

@Raiders22

 FWIW we had that scenario of water days in the past when the area had massive rains and the storm drainage system was over filled and the treatment plants were not functioning properly, the municipality put a nasty mandate out of not watering every day but every other and asked for a decrease in usage in all aspects. Guess what, we survived!!! Who would have thought that draconian GOP legislative mandates would be survivable and that people can exist having strict controls in place, it was an amazing accomplishment that citizens can actually cope and deal with restrictions from time to time.

The showerheads are engineered to specs that meet usage requirements for anywhere in the country, if people are experiencing trickle from a showerhead it is not due to a flow restrictor it is due to a low min flow into the house for the reasons I listed. There is either a lack of pressure on a septic or if the main has a restriction, there can be mineral buildup which reduces flow and there can be crap in the lines like caulk or debris (I experienced this) those are the reasons for your quandry not a flow restrictor. And yes it is so unbearable and draconian for citizens to use their hands and remove the top of the showerhead, then get a pair of needle nose plyers and take out the plastic restrictor. These steps are so taxing to the consumer they should probably file suit or go on conservative social media and scream their outrage...wait they do that already now and every day.

So terrible or funny I’m not sure , but Trump took an Obama picture in the White House down and put one of himself up yelling “ fight “ after the assassination attempt in its place .

And nothing is ever funny enough to me to where I would need or want to roll on the floor and laugh , especially that’s written in this forum , but I’m gonna go ahead and try this out for the first time ever to see what it feels like :

@wallstreetcappers

 It is not about ‘surviving’ a crisis.  It is about ‘surviving’ unnecessary restrictions.  I was not talking about simply watering yards, etc.  I am talking about no water usage at all as an extreme example.  
It doesn’t matter what specs the shower heads are designed to.  They should not have unnecessary restrictions just for an agenda. 
Again, it is not just about shower heads.  It is about washers, stoves, EVs, etc.  Let the folks decide if they want a washer that does not fully soak their clothes, etc. 

Of course, folks complain online and to congressmen and there are articles online about it.  The same as any politically-driven concern the folks have.