The New Yorker: Bush's Midnight Hour of Deregulation

Paul Kiesel
Attorney
(866) 735-1102 Ext 385
Visit Paul Kiesel on Avvo
Posted by Paul KieselNovember 17, 2008 8:35 PM

Below is an article from this week's New Yorker on President Bush's last-minute push to pass everything he has can in the final days of his presidency, between now and January 20, 2009, which is known as the "Midnight Hour." Per Bush's agenda, it should be known as "Midnight Deregulation." The former term is eponymous with what John Adams did in the final hours of his presidency (literally), appointing several judges before his successor, Thomas Jefferson, assumed the role of president the following day.

Bush's midnight hour, based on his proposed changes to consumer protection laws and environmental laws, promises to be a very dark time and one that will rollover into the Obama Administration.

The New Yorker, November 24, 2008

When President Jimmy Carter lost his bid for reëlection, in November, 1980, he had lots of unfinished business that he did not intend to leave that way. Carter’s Administration spent the next several weeks generating regulations at an unprecedented rate, until, in its last month in office, it published more than ten thousand pages of new rules. These rules, which, like most issued by federal agencies, needed no congressional approval, touched on everything from crash tests for cars to access to medical records, and a phrase was coined to describe them. They became known as “midnight regulations,” after the “midnight judges” appointed by John Adams in the final hours of his Presidency.

Since Jimmy Carter, every President has complained about midnight regulations and, four or eight years later, every President has issued them. On a percentage basis, George Bush senior holds the record: his Administration issued a greater proportion of its rules during the midnight period—generally defined as the last three months in office—than any other President’s. In absolute terms, though, Bill Clinton takes the gold: his Administration, during its midnight phase, published more than twenty-six thousand pages’ worth of rules in the Federal Register. (According to the National Journal, by the time Clinton left office “the journalists who cover the White House had thrown up their hands at the prospect of keeping up.”) President George W. Bush used the timing of these regulations as a rationale for suspending many of them. “I told people pretty plainly that I was going to review all the last-minute decisions that my predecessor had made, and that is exactly what we’re doing,” he declared.

Now, of course, Bush has entered into his own midnight period, and it promises to be a dark time indeed. Among the many new regulations—or, rather, deregulations—the Administration has proposed are rules that would: make it harder for the government to limit workers’ exposure to toxins, eliminate environmental review from decisions affecting fisheries, and ease restrictions on companies that blow up mountains to get at the coal underneath them. Other midnight regulations in the works include rules to allow “factory farms” to ignore the Clean Water Act, rules making it tougher for employees to take family or medical leave, and rules that would effectively gut the Endangered Species Act. Most regulations are subject to public input; such is the sense of urgency that the Administration has brought to the task of despoliation that the Interior Department completed its “review” of two hundred thousand public comments on the endangered-species rules in just four days, a feat that, one congressional aide calculated, required each staff member involved to read through comments at the rate of seven per minute. “So little time, so much damage” is how the Times recently put it.

Why do Presidents wait till the last moment to push through changes they’ve had the power to impose all along? Legal scholars have advanced a variety of explanations; these range from megalomania (each Administration tries to extend its influence into the next) to simple distraction (federal agencies, like ninth graders, have a hard time focussing until they’re up against a deadline). Under the best of circumstances, experts point out, rule-making is a laborious process; many of the regulations published toward the end of the Clinton Administration—such as a rule limiting the amount of arsenic allowed in public drinking water—had been the subject of years’ worth of hearings and scientific review.

But none of these explanations is adequate to the current situation. What distinguishes this Administration in its final days—as in its earlier ones—is the purity of its cynicism. White House officials haven’t even bothered to argue that these new rules are in the public interest. Such a claim would, in any event, be impossible to defend, as just about every midnight regulation being proposed is, evidently, a gift to a favored industry.

Consider, for example, the case of New Source Review. Utility companies have always hated this provision of the Clean Air Act, which requires them to install up-to-date pollution controls when they build new plants or renovate old ones. A new rule being circulated would take a trick that the power company Duke Energy dreamed up for circumventing New Source Review and turn it into law. According to the Administration’s own estimates, this new anti-rule would allow an additional seventy million tons of CO2 to be released into the atmosphere each year. “If you thought the first hundred days of the Bush Administration were bad, just wait and see what the last hundred could bring,” Representative Edward Markey, of Massachusetts, has warned.

Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate have already indicated that they will try to rescind the most egregious of Bush’s midnight regulations. There are a few ways to do this, all of them difficult. Under an obscure law passed in 1996, Congress has the power to revoke recently imposed rules. That law, though, has been used successfully only once. (President Bush, for all his grumbling—and despite Republican control of Congress for much of his tenure—ended up implementing more than three-quarters of the midnight rules that Clinton had left him, including the one on arsenic, just as they were written.) Alternatively, once in office, Barack Obama could ask his agencies to go through the rule-making process all over again. But, by the time that was finished, a good deal of the damage might already have been done. Once a power plant has been rebuilt, it can’t readily be unrebuilt.

The Bush Administration, probably as a result of its own experience, is now trying to craft rules that are as difficult as possible to reverse. Generally speaking, major federal regulations go into effect sixty days after they are published. On November 20th, it will be sixty days before Bush leaves office. Over at the Federal Register, it’s going to be a busy week.

2 Comments

Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Delle Colahan
Posted by Delle Colahan
November 26, 2008 12:14 PM

I applaud many of President Bush's midnight rules.

Our world was not meant to last forever, we are to use our resources.

Wolves and cougars are killing many ranch livestock "out west", and rancher's are not being compensated for their losses. Rancher's and farmer's are also being restricted from using water sources if there is a possibility that an endangered species may be inhabiting the water. Farmer's and rancher's are responsible for feeding our country and the world.

Timber in SE Oregon is being destroyed by "Pine beetles". Thousands of acres are going to waste. It is not able to be logged because of "environmentalists" restrictions. Millions of dollars are going to waste. It is a huge fire hazard. When forest fires get started, they are destroying thousands of acres of private land, as well. This is huge financial loss to private landowners, who do not get compensated for their losses.

Those who think they are protecting our "environment" are actually helping "destroy" it.

Private landowners do a much better job protecting their land, and taking care of it than government regulations do.

Private landownders keep their timber thinned. They log "beatle killed" trees, so the beatles don't spread to the rest of the forest. However, the USFS has been blocked from logging much timber at all by environmental regulations. So, the beatles are spreading to all the private land around, as well.

These kinds of policies will bankrupt our country. Oh, wait a minute...that's already happened.

I have a great idea...rather than continuing to give government bail-outs to everyone with their hand out (especially those who purposefully bankrupted their own companies and "went out" with "Golden parachutes") let's give every American $250,000 dollars. Then they can go out and buy their house, or invest the money themselves; rather than saddling our children and grandchildren with an astronomic national debt.

At least 48% of the American people are wise to what the government is up to. Tax us into the poor house, re-distribute wealth. Then, before you know it--nobody has any money, except the government and their buddies. This is how you set up a dictator. The American people are not stupid. That's why about the only things selling around the entire country, right now, are guns, ammunition and safe's.

jason
Posted by jason
November 30, 2008 5:59 PM

Howie

I don't understand how you and others can't understand why a legitimate loan modification company can't and shouldn't charge an "up front" fee for providing you with what seems to me as in invaluable service. Sure, you can do it for free by yourself, but there are a lot of things in life we can do by ourselves, but instead pay someone else who is more qualified. Take your example of the law firm. If you get sued for something, you are allowed to defend yourself for free if you want, but instead you go hire an attorney b/c they are more qualified and more likely to succeed. In almost all cases the attorney will charge you a "retainer" or an "up front fee". In this case, they will also not be able to give you a 100% guarantee that they will be successful and get you the exact results that you want. But they are going to do a lot of work in trying. The same is true for a Loan Modification company. There is a lot of work involved in doing this and the end result could be HUGE for you. If the best result is achieved, you will not lose your home to foreclosure, you will end up paying a lot less for your home than you were previously, which will obviously give you more money to spend on paying other bills. In other words, the end result is saving you a TON of money and stress. If done correctly, this can end up saving you in the neighborhood of $6000/yr which can be $180,000 over 30 yrs. (your mortgage term) And for this the loan company is charging you $1500-$3000) if reputable. I'd take that return on investment any day.

If you want to know why they can't give you a 100% guarantee, its simple, no two cases are the same, and no two banks are the same. Rules are always changing, and it may come down to who is working your case that day and their mood. This is unfortunate, but true. Another very important reason is that people lie, or "forget" to mention or "omit" things and then after spending a lot of time and effort on a case, the omitted information could result in a rejection.

This is why you should never work with a company that does not offer some form of money back offer. I don't agree that it should be a 100% money back offer b/c rejections are not usually the result of the loan modifier and they still need to be compensated for all the time and effort their firm invested in trying to change your life. We do actually see this as changing your life, and we take it seriously, but we aren't charities either.

So, yes, we understand that you are in this position b/c money is tight, but we are going to perform a service that will change that and will actually be paying for itself with the money we save you and put you in a position to continue to save money. So to say you might as well just pay the late fee is a very flawed mindset and could be a reason you are in this situation to begin with. You could take that $1500-$3000 and turn that into a $180,000 savings which allows you to keep your home and life, or you could pay the late fee and then next month still be facing a foreclosure. Seems like a no brainer to me.

You also mentioned that you would be willing to pay after the bank has approved your modification. Well, are you willing to give us a 100% guarantee that you will pay us?? And how do we enforce that? The bank doesn't care if we get paid, and they have already agreed to modify your loan so we've done our work and you could just not pay and what can we do about it? You think that there are only dishonest people on the service side??

If a company that you work with does end up being unsuccessful, and does not refund you the portion they promised, than your recourse is to report them to the better business bureau and post negative reviews on blogs like this. The market will take care of them.

I hope you take this to heart and trust someone to work for you and help you keep your home.

Best of luck!

Comments for this article are closed.

Subscribe to InjuryBoard Los Angeles

InjuryBoard Los Angeles RSS Feeds

Keep up with the latest updates using your favorite RSS reader

Injury Board Los Angeles is brought to you by Kiesel, Boucher & Larson, LLP

Legal Assistance Center

More Info
Kiesel, Boucher & Larson, LLP (866) 735-1102 Ext 385 www.kbla.com
google
Personal Injury Lawyers Serving: LA, Burbank, Compton, Downey, Glendale, Hawthorne, Huntington Park, Inglewood, Lynwood, Monterey Park, Pasadena, Santa Monica, South Gate, West Hollywood, Alhambra, Beverly Hills
8648 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills, California 90211 [ Show Map ]
Better Business Bureau Accredited Business Confidential

Your question will be referred to an attorney near you. If your question is of a legal nature, then by submitting this form you agree you are not forming a formal attorney / client relationship. Read our full privacy policy.

Looking for an InjuryBoard attorney closer to home? Click here.

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address