Senator Mike Lee: Give More Power to Congress (and Take it Away from Federal Agencies)
The constitutional conservative has an ambitious plan to rebalance the separation of powers
"A government that's that big, that takes that much of your money, that is big enough and powerful enough to spy on you, to lie to you, to target you, is a government that we ought not have in the first place," Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) told Reason TV.
Mike Lee isn't content simply to identify the out-of-control expansion of federal agencies. He's got his eye on a much larger mission to enact deep structural reform that will rebalance the separation of powers in Washington to their constitutionally prescribed limits. But before he can do that, the junior senator from Utah wants the voting public to understand how federal power got so far out of whack to begin with.
Lee's book, Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America's Founding Document, aims to do just that. It explains how and why Congress delegates much of its authority to federal agencies. Simply put, the outsourcing of power allows legislators to enjoy all of the credit for passing laws, while evading responsibility for the details when things go wrong. "All of the credit, none of the blame," as Senator Lee sums it up.
But while legislators can be held accountable for their actions, federal agencies cannot. Civil servants don't stand for election. Yet they are empowered by Congress to create regulations, enact penalties, and enforce punishment on the public. Today, agencies have become what Senator Lee calls "a super legislative and executive" branch of government unto themselves.
The empowerment of federal agencies is the product of decades of legislative legerdemain, from the New Deal to the present day. The delicate balance of federal authority, which once worked well, has gradually eroded to the point where many constitutional restraints on power have all but disappeared.
What can be done to rebalance power in Washington? Coming from a small government Republican, Senator Lee's solution at first may seem surprising. He wants to restore power and responsibility to Congress by wresting it away from federal agencies.
To that end, the Senator has co-sponsored The Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act – or REINS Act, for short – which would require any regulation with an economic impact of $100 million or more to be ratified by Congress. He is also spearheading The Article I Project, which seeks to reassert and reinvigorate congress' legislative power.
The road to reform in Washington is long and uphill. Senator Lee is in it for the long haul.
Runs 15:40 minutes.
Produced by Todd Krainin. Hosted by Nick Gillespie. Cameras by Josh Swain and Krainin.
Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to ReasonTV's YouTube Channel to receive notification when new material goes live.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
which would require any regulation with an economic impact of $100 million or more to be ratified by Congress.
I foresee a great increase in the number of projects "projected" to have an impact of $99.9 million.
So you're saying they need to factor in structuring?
Or parallel construct...uring?
He'd be better off trying to get every non-enumerated federal function/department turned into an 'interstate compact' form rather than a 'federal' form. That is much easier to accomplish than just eliminating the departments. It takes all those depts/functions out of the executive branch and turns the mgmt over to states-in-compact. It eliminates the 'mandating authority' which eliminates the bureaucratic incentive to regulate. And it still requires Congress to oversee and/or budget money if that is viewed as necessary. Even more significantly, those depts 'customers' become the states themselves, so there is a possibility that states start either dropping out of the compact or demanding that the functions get whittled down. So it becomes possible to have a political demand for 'less'
I talk about the Constitution all the time with my friends and family when talking about political issues. Some do not care at all and zone out. Some listen when the Constitutional argument favors their outcome. And a small few will listen and even reconsider their positions if the Constitutional argument, from an originalists perspective, goes against their favored outcome.
Nice interview, Nick. I appreciate Mike Lee fighting the good fight.
How about you strip the agencies (EPA, IRS et al) of their police powers and you guys just do your f***ing jobs.
Interesting that Rand Paul is listed as the primary sponsor of REINS. Would have been nice if he had pushed that a bit harder while he was running for the nomination, but I guess he figured governmental structure was just a bit too esoteric for the man in the street... he was probably right.
After a few acrimonious debates which "paralyze" the Congress, it will start exempting new powers granted to agencies from the requirements of this bill. When these exemptions become too commonplace, the REINS act will be repealed. The only way to make it stick would be to make it a Constitutional amendment, and that won't happen. Besides, REINS? These acronym-titled bills are part of the problem with government, from RICO to the USA PATRIOT act and beyond. Those, and the one's called [sympathetic dead girl]'s Law (although those are more often found in state legislatures). I wish those titles could be banned, but again, such a ban simply wouldn't stick.
This is crazy talk. You're telling me he is proposing that Congresscritters take responsibility for decisions rather than blaming an agency? Ha!
RE: Senator Mike Lee: Give More Power to Congress (and Take it Away from Federal Agencies)
The constitutional conservative has an ambitious plan to rebalance the separation of powers
This madman must be stopped.
How dare he attempt to remove unlimited powers to the apparatchiks who help enslave us.
Where did he get these ideas?
Hopefully, not from that racist, misogynist and archaic US Constitution.
That would only make our slavers' powers diluted.
Just think of the horrors that would produce.
But he is one of those Republicans who opposes abortions and gay marriage.
So when will the staff of Reason start sneering at him?
actually, the radical shift of control away from the Congress and onto the Executive branch was seriously advanced by Honest Abe, the Former Railroad Corporation Lawyer turned Chief Hooh Hah. HE is the first to radically wrest power away from Congress and take it to himself. HE is the one who began the hard push to aggregate unauthorised power to the Executive Branch, and generally to centralise inordinate amounts of power.
I like Lee's plan, as far as it goes. But he utterly fails to get at the ROOT of the matter. READ Article 1 Section 18, I believe it is, where the Constitution clearly names the few powers FedGov shall have. Then, in the Bill of Rights, that same document plainly states that ALL power not granted FedGov, or prohibited the States, is reserved to the STATES. Look at all those executive branch alphabet soup agencies... almost none of them deal with anything assigned FedGov in the Constitution. Education, agriculture, chemicals, environment, food, "substances" we may/mayn't put into our bodies, control/managements of lands specifically prohibited to FedGov, science, energy, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, explosives, "safety", transportation, wildlife, water, air, shorelines, communication other than mail, securities, finance, labor, raw materials or minerals, plants, including trees,
How bout Mr. Lee start THERE? Congress outghtn't be able to authorise funding for ANYTHING prohibited FedGov by the Constitution, and that includes 90% of what these agencies do.
uptil I saw the receipt which was of $4452 , I accept ...that...my mom in-law woz like truley bringing home money part time from their laptop. . there neighbour haz done this for only 9 months and resantly paid the loans on there condo and purchased a gorgeous Cadillac . go to this site .....
CLICK THIS LINK=====>> http://www.earnmax6.com/
good federal authority..
Packers and Movers in Mumbai @http://www.allcitypackersmovers.com/
Packers and Movers in Bandra @http://www.allcitypackersmovers.com/bandra/
3:48 - isn't Dubya on record for calling the constitution "a goddamned piece of paper?" Not sure how true that is, or if it was taken out of context, however. At any rate, it's certainly how he ran the majority of his administration...