Debate Desk
Do Government Regulations Cost the Economy Nothing While Protecting Us?
Rules protect people and also carry compliance costs that fall hardest on small firms; counting them is the first step toward good regulation.
The claim
Supporters say that regulations protect health, safety and the environment, that their benefits exceed their costs and that complaints about red tape come from industries trying to avoid responsibility.
The answer in three points
- Many rules are valuable, and conservatives do not oppose all of them. The issue is whether each rule's benefit exceeds its cost, which should be tested openly. A rule that saves lives at a reasonable price is worth having.
- Costs are real and unevenly borne. A company with a legal department can handle compliance, and a small firm with ten employees cannot. Large firms sometimes support regulations that protect them from smaller rivals.
- Washington does not count the total. Agencies publish thousands of rules each year without an overall budget for their costs. A regulatory budget, a requirement that Congress vote on major rules and periodic review would make costs visible.
The honest middle is that regulation is a tool with a price, and good governments use it knowing the price. A rule that is clear, tested and reviewed on a schedule earns public trust, while a rule that nobody has measured invites suspicion. Citizens should expect every agency to show its work: what problem the rule solves, what it costs, who pays, and when it will be looked at again.
The numbers
- The Federal Register published 2,441 final rules in 2025 and 3,248 in 2024.
- The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 sets the basic process for federal rulemaking, according to the Department of Justice.
- The Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy has reported that small firms pay more per employee to comply with federal regulation than large firms, according to its research.
What they will say next
"Without rules we would have contaminated food and unsafe cars." Some rules are needed, and each should be justified. Tort law, reputation and competition also protect consumers.
"Business exaggerates costs." It sometimes does, and agency estimates of benefits can also be inflated. Independent review would help both.
"Deregulation caused the financial crisis." The causes were many, and government policies on housing and credit had a major role.
"The rules are written by experts." They are often written by staff under guidance and not approved by anyone elected. Congress can reclaim that power.
Good rules are those that a free people would adopt knowing the price.
"Every rule has a story behind it." Yes, and the story is often a real harm that deserved a response. Over time, though, rules pile up, overlap and outlive the problem that produced them. Few agencies are ever asked to remove an old rule, so the stack grows even when conditions change. Periodic review, with a sunset date for rules that no one defends, is a modest way to keep the stack honest, and families and small firms would feel the relief.