With guest host John Harwood.
A ProPublica and New York Times investigation of President Trump’s regulatory rollbacks raises red flags. We’ll dig in.
President Trump’s legislative agenda has stalled in Congress – but his effort to lift regulations on American business is a different story. Who’s making those decisions? Why? At what cost? We’ll talk to investigative reporters, and advocates on both sides of the debate. This hour, On Point: How the Trump administration is changing the rules. And questions of ethics from DC to Vermont. — John Harwood.
Amit Narang, regulatory expert at Public Citizen.
Richard Williams, former director of the Regulatory Studies Program at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
From The Reading List
ProPublica: Trump Has Secretive Teams to Roll Back Regulations, Led by Hires With Deep Industry Ties — “President Trump entered office pledging to cut red tape, and within weeks, he ordered his administration to assemble teams to aggressively scale back government regulations. But the effort — a signature theme in Trump’s populist campaign for the White House — is being conducted in large part out of public view and often by political appointees with deep industry ties and potential conflicts.”
New York Times: The Business Links of Those Leading Trump’s Rollbacks — “An investigation has revealed a string of possible conflicts, including some hires who may be reviewing rules their previous employers tried to weaken or kill, and others who may personally profit if certain regulations are changed.”
The Hill: Under Trump, focus shifts to scrapping regulations — “Federal agencies have shifted their focus under the Trump administration from writing regulations to getting rid of them. In just the past few days, the Education Department said it is working to redo two Obama-era rules aimed at reining in for-profit colleges, the Food and Drug Administration indefinitely delayed new rules to overhaul nutrition facts labels and the Consumer Product Safety Commission asked the public to suggest ways it can reduce the burdens and costs of its existing rules.”