Browse regulations

Conservation Security Program providing financial and technical assistance to farmers for soil, water, and resource conservation on private agricultural lands, with tiered participation levels based on conservation treatment standards.

Federal conservation subsidies distort agricultural markets, create dependency on government payments, and represent unconstitutional overreach into local land management decisions that should be handled by states or private conservation groups.

The Commodity Credit Corporation levies quarterly assessments on tobacco manufacturers and importers from 2005-2014, capped at $10.14 billion total, to fund transition payments to tobacco quota holders and producers as compensation for the elimination of tobacco quotas under the 2004 Tobacco Reform Act.

This regulation exemplifies regulatory capture and market distortion—taxing one industry segment to bail out another—creating a $10B+ hidden tax on consumers while perpetuating government interference in tobacco markets. The compliance burden and administrative costs serve no legitimate constitutional purpose. The 2014 sunset makes it obsolete, but even as active policy, eliminating quotas without taxpayer compensation would have better aligned with limited government and free enterprise principles.

Federal marketing order for pears produced in Oregon and Washington, establishing two industry committees (Fresh and Processed) with authority to regulate shipments, levy assessments on handlers, and conduct research and promotion. The Secretary of Agriculture can limit quantities shipped by grade, size, and quality, and handlers must pay mandatory assessments to fund the program.

This regulation creates a government-sanctioned cartel that restricts supply, raises consumer prices, and imposes a hidden tax via mandatory assessments on handlers. Industry insiders dominate the committees and use government power to protect incumbent operators from competition—exactly the regulatory capture problem von Mises and Hayek warned against. The order federalizes purely intrastate commerce (Oregon/Washington pears), violating Tenth Amendment federalism principles. The quantity restrictions distort markets, reduce supply, and harm consumers, while the assessment system forces handlers to fund their own regulation and industry promotion. Small handlers face disproportionate burden from compliance costs and quantity limits, creating barriers to entry. The complexity—185,000 pages of federal regulations overall—means no one can fully comprehend these rules, undermining rule of law. The entire marketing order system should be eliminated.

This regulation establishes the informal appeals process for the Farm Service Agency (FSA), including procedures for reconsideration, appeals to county/state committees, mediation, and review by the National Appeals Division (NAD). It defines key terms, specifies which decisions are appealable, sets timeframes, and outlines procedural rules for hearings, transcripts, and implementation of final decisions.

This appeals bureaucracy imposes significant hidden costs on taxpayers and farmers while perpetuating the administrative state. The multi-layered review process creates compliance burdens, delays, and complexity that primarily benefit the agency and legal/mediation industries rather than participants. It exemplifies regulatory capture through county/state committees that often comprise local agricultural interests. The system could be replaced with simpler, faster dispute resolution that respects property rights and due process without this elaborate bureaucratic apparatus. The unseen costs include distorted incentives, reduced program efficiency, and barriers to entry for smaller farmers who cannot afford to navigate the system.

The Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) Program, administered by NRCS and FS, provides federal assistance for emergency recovery measures addressing watershed impairments caused by natural disasters. It funds runoff retardation, erosion prevention, and floodplain easements on affected lands across U.S. territories. Federal cost-share ranges from 75%-90%, with priority given to exigency situations threatening life/property. Projects must be economically/environmentally defensible with required sponsor contributions.

Program institutionalizes federal overreach into local watershed management, violating 10th Amendment principles. Cost-sharing creates moral hazard where communities rely on federal funds instead of developing self-sufficient disaster resilience. Bureaucratic prioritization (endangered species, wetlands, etc.) overrides local knowledge and property rights. Perpetual easements transfer land ownership to federal government indefinitely, eliminating private stewardship incentives. Over $2T annual regulatory compliance costs include EWP administrative overhead buried in USDA budgets. Better outcomes achieved through state/local programs respecting property rights and markets.

Regulation governs conduct and facility use at the U.S. National Arboretum, prohibiting vandalism, fires, weapons, drugs, solicitation, noise, and other disruptive activities; it also establishes fees for tours, facility rentals, and commercial photography, with reservation requirements and penalties for violations.

Deleting this regulation would likely result in property damage, safety hazards, and disruption of the Arboretum's research and educational missions, harming the public interest in preserving this national resource.

Federal regulations implementing the Agricultural Bioterrorism Protection Act of 2002, establishing requirements for possession, use, and transfer of select agents and toxins that pose severe threats to plant health or plant products. Covers registration, security plans, personnel approval, and specific exclusions for naturally occurring agents and medical waste.

This represents federal overreach into biosecurity that should be handled by states and private entities. The extensive registration requirements, security plans, and personnel approval processes create massive compliance costs that burden research institutions and small businesses while providing questionable security benefits. States are better positioned to assess local biosecurity risks and implement appropriate measures without federal bureaucracy.

This regulation defines terms and establishes administrative procedures for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), a federal nutrition assistance program providing USDA Foods to low-income seniors aged 60+ to supplement their diets. It outlines program structure, eligibility requirements, income guidelines, agency responsibilities, and operational procedures.

This regulation represents unconstitutional federal overreach into welfare and nutrition assistance that should be handled by states and private charities. The program creates dependency on government handouts, distorts food markets, and imposes costly administrative burdens on taxpayers while duplicating existing assistance programs. States and local communities are better positioned to address senior nutrition needs through targeted, voluntary charitable efforts.

The regulation governs the USDA Farmers Market at headquarters in Washington, DC, specifying rules for participation, product offerings, and market operations. It ensures a producer-only market with a balanced mix of fresh, high-quality agricultural products and value-added items, while encouraging food gleaning and compliance with federal property regulations.

The regulation imposes unnecessary bureaucratic constraints on a local farmers market, limiting participation and innovation. It creates barriers to entry for small farmers and vendors, reduces competition, and stifles the market's ability to adapt to changing consumer preferences. The costs of compliance and enforcement outweigh the benefits, and the market would function more efficiently with minimal regulation.

The Clingstone Peach Diversion Program provides payments to California growers who remove clingstone peach trees, with the goal of reducing the supply of clingstone peaches and supporting the industry.

The program's costs, including administrative and payment costs, outweigh its potential benefits, and the program's goals could be achieved through market forces rather than government intervention.

Establishes administrative procedures for imposing civil penalties and assessments against persons who make false claims or statements to the Department of Homeland Security, including hearing and appeal rights for those accused.

Protects taxpayers from fraud by creating clear procedures to penalize false claims and statements, ensuring accountability when individuals or entities seek improper benefits from government programs.

This regulation establishes a new human resources management system for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under 5 U.S.C. 9701, waiving and replacing key provisions of Title 5 (civil service laws) covering classification, pay, performance management, labor relations, and adverse actions. It creates a mission-centered, performance-focused system with discretionary authority vested in the Secretary, establishes occupational clusters and bands instead of GS grades, limits collective bargaining on classification, and provides for limited employee 'continuing collaboration' rather than traditional labor negotiations.

This regulation expands bureaucratic power while eliminating statutory employee protections, creating unchecked discretion for the Secretary that invites abuse and regulatory capture. The purported 'flexibility' concentrates authority in agency leadership without meaningful oversight, weakens merit system principles, and imposes massive administrative complexity—another layer of red tape that increases compliance costs while undermining the rule of law by allowing officials to 'waive' Congressional statutes. The 'pay-for-performance' features create perverse incentives to game metrics rather than accomplish mission, while the elimination of collective bargaining rights on classification strips workers of due process. This is precisely the bureaucratic overreach that Hayek warned about—central planners assuming they can design superior systems, ignoring the unseen costs of disrupted careers, reduced morale, and arbitrary personnel decisions that harm the very homeland security the agency purports to protect.

Requires HHS employees to file annual and event-based financial disclosure reports on outside employment, income, and financial interests in organizations substantially affected by agency actions, with confidentiality protections and strict reporting deadlines.

This regulation imposes excessive bureaucratic overhead on government employees, diverting time and resources from public service to compliance paperwork. Financial conflicts are already covered by existing ethics laws and criminal statutes; this system creates a false sense of security while enabling regulatory capture through compliance theater. The costs — administrative burden, privacy intrusion, and chilling effect on legitimate side work — far outweigh the negligible benefit of detecting rare conflicts already prohibitable under criminal law.

This regulation aims to implement section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs or activities conducted by Executive agencies or the United States Postal Service.

Americans would be worse off without this regulation because it provides essential protections for individuals with disabilities, ensuring they have equal access to participate in and benefit from federal programs and activities, which is a fundamental aspect of promoting equality and fairness.

Regulation governing Voluntary Separation Incentive Payments (VSIP) - a buyout program allowing federal agencies to offer financial incentives to eligible employees (3+ years continuous service) to voluntarily leave government service through resignation, early retirement, or optional retirement. Requires agency plans to be approved by OPM, includes eligibility criteria, repayment requirements if reemployed within 5 years, and waiver provisions for unique skills or emergencies.

This regulation enables responsible federal workforce reduction through voluntary means, aligning with limited government principles. Deleting it would remove the structured framework for orderly downsizing, potentially leading to chaotic reductions that could bypass proper fiscal controls and employee protections. The modest administrative overhead is justified by ensuring VSIP programs follow approved plans, prevent coercion, and include repayment safeguards. This tool helps shrink government while maintaining rule of law in personnel management.