If President Obama's administration can ease hundreds of regulatory burdens, were they reasonable and necessary in the first place?
The administration last week outlined regulatory changes on businesses and local governments, with the self-congratulatory announcement the actions would save businesses billions of dollars and tens of millions in hours of work.
The Democratic administration's plan to ease regulatory burdens would have been a pleasant, unexpected surprise, except it reflects both a political reaction and a correction of previous over-regulation.
Obama's action was not a spontaneous initiative to unburden businesses and local governments from superfluous federal mandates. Instead, the proposals unveiled last week resulted from a January executive order after Republicans won control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Although the administration's motives are suspect, rescinding the regulations is sensible.
The proposals include:
• Eliminating "redundant" vapor recovery systems required by the Environmental Protection Agency at gas stations in some states.
• Easing the paperwork physicians and hospitals must file in compliance with Department of Health and Human Services requirements.
• Reducing more than 1.9 million hours of reporting employers must file each year, at a savings of more than $40 million.
These and other measures are reasonable reductions of redundant or unnecessary regulations.
Too bad the proposals were prompted by politics rather than prudence.