Browse regulations

This regulation governs federal servicing of Minor Program loans (grazing associations, irrigation/drainage associations, and non-farm recreation loans), including nondiscrimination compliance reviews, security inspections, subordination/exchange/sale provisions, transfer/assumption procedures, graduation requirements, reamortization options, protective advances, and liquidation processes. It establishes detailed administrative procedures for federal loan management and oversight of specific agricultural/enterprise lending programs.

This regulation represents federal overreach into local agricultural associations and non-farm enterprise lending that should be handled by state/local governments or private markets. The extensive compliance review requirements, security inspection mandates, and administrative procedures create costly bureaucratic overhead that distorts local decision-making and raises barriers to entry for small associations. The nondiscrimination provisions duplicate existing civil rights laws while imposing unique federal reporting burdens on these specific loan programs.

This regulation implements Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit racial, color, and national origin discrimination in DHS programs receiving federal financial assistance. It establishes comprehensive nondiscrimination requirements, enforcement mechanisms, and procedural safeguards including investigations, hearings, and potential termination of federal funding for non-compliance.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it protects fundamental civil rights by ensuring federal funds cannot be used to discriminate against citizens based on race, color, or national origin. Without these protections, federal financial assistance could be distributed in discriminatory ways, creating systemic inequality and violating constitutional equal protection principles.

Federal regulation implementing Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, prohibiting sex discrimination in federally funded educational programs and establishing enforcement mechanisms, definitions, and exemptions for religious organizations, military institutions, and certain youth organizations.

Creates massive bureaucratic compliance burden exceeding $2 trillion annually, distorts educational markets through coercive federal intervention in state/local matters, enables regulatory capture through revolving door between agencies and universities, and violates Tenth Amendment principles by federalizing education policy that belongs to states.

DHS regulation implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities in all DHS programs and activities. Requires reasonable accommodations, facility accessibility, and establishes complaint procedures to ensure equal access to services like FEMA, TSA, and immigration processing.

Deletion would remove clear, standardized rules preventing DHS from discriminating against people with disabilities, risking exclusion from critical government services (disaster relief, aviation security, immigration) and undermining equal protection. The modest administrative costs are justified to ensure all Americans can access federal programs without bias.

Prohibits use of federal funds for lobbying related to federal contracts, grants, loans, and cooperative agreements. Requires certification and disclosure forms, establishes civil penalties, and mandates annual compliance reporting.

This regulation creates a complex compliance bureaucracy that imposes significant costs on businesses and government agencies. It distorts the political process by creating different rules for government-funded vs. non-government-funded speech, and its enforcement mechanisms (civil penalties up to $100,000) create a chilling effect on legitimate advocacy. The regulation's complexity and reporting requirements disproportionately burden small businesses while failing to address the underlying issue of government favoritism toward special interests.

DHS FOIA processing procedures including request submission, tracking, expedited processing, consultations/referrals, and submitter notice requirements for confidential commercial information

Creates massive bureaucratic infrastructure that delays public access to government information while protecting bureaucratic interests rather than serving citizens. The 185,000+ pages of CFR already create regulatory capture - this adds another layer of administrative complexity that benefits lawyers and bureaucrats over ordinary Americans seeking transparency.

IMLS employees must obtain written approval before engaging in outside employment with prohibited sources, providing detailed disclosures about the nature of work, potential conflicts, and certifications regarding use of government resources; supplements broader federal ethics regulations under 5 CFR 2635.

Prior approval requirement imposes significant compliance costs and restricts employees' economic liberty for minimal marginal benefit over existing ethics standards; creates bureaucratic overhead and deters qualified candidates from public service while addressing risks better handled by post-hoc enforcement and existing laws.

Requires NEH employees to obtain written approval before engaging in outside employment with prohibited sources, ensuring conflicts of interest are avoided. Applies to all forms of compensated or uncompensated non-federal work and requires detailed disclosure of duties, compensation, and potential overlaps with official responsibilities.

Prevents actual and apparent conflicts of interest where NEH employees could influence grants or policies that benefit their outside employers. The minimal paperwork burden is far outweighed by the corruption risk this rule mitigates; without it, entities seeking NEH funding could covertly reward agency staff through lucrative outside positions, undermining public trust and fair administration of humanities grants.

Ethics regulations for National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) employees regarding outside employment with prohibited sources. Requires written approval from supervisor and ethics official before engaging in any compensated or uncompensated non-Federal employment, with specific disclosure requirements about the work, hours, and certification that no official resources or nonpublic information will be used.

Prevents conflicts of interest and misuse of government position. Without these safeguards, NEA employees could leverage taxpayer-funded positions to gain unfair advantages in private sector work, undermining public trust in federal arts funding and potentially directing government resources to personal business interests.

This regulation implements the Privacy Act of 1974 for the Office of Government Ethics (OGE), governing access, amendment, disclosure, and maintenance of personal records in OGE's systems. It defines procedures for individuals to request and appeal access to or correction of their records, establishes fee structures, and outlines employee duties regarding record handling. The systems primarily contain financial disclosure reports and internal personnel records for current and former government employees and nominees.

Without these implementing procedures, the Privacy Act's fundamental privacy protections against government overreach would be meaningless. The regulation operationalizes statutory rights, ensuring individuals can access and correct their records, challenge inaccuracies, and hold the government accountable. Deleting it would create a vacuum where OGE could ignore Privacy Act obligations, enabling unchecked government collection and use of personal data—a direct threat to liberty. While the administrative costs exist, they are the necessary price of constraining state power and maintaining the rule of law that government actions must be knowable and subject to individual control.

Establishes guidelines for the Office of Government Ethics to solicit, accept, and utilize gifts to aid its mission, including policies on gift sources, types, conflict of interest standards, and accounting requirements for gifts valued over $500.

Creates unnecessary bureaucracy and compliance costs for a small agency while providing minimal public benefit. The detailed regulations on gift acceptance, accounting procedures, and conflict of interest determinations create a regulatory burden that exceeds any potential gain in ethical governance. Private sector ethics offices and smaller agencies manage without such extensive gift regulations.

The U.S. Office of Government Ethics (OGE) is an independent executive branch agency that provides leadership and oversight for ethics programs, prevents and resolves conflicts of interest among executive branch employees, and fosters high ethical standards to maintain public confidence in government integrity.

Without OGE, there would be no independent, centralized oversight of executive branch ethics, creating a significant risk of increased corruption and conflicts of interest that would undermine public trust and effective governance. Alternative mechanisms like Congressional oversight, DOJ enforcement, or media scrutiny are either reactive, politically constrained, or insufficient for systematic prevention and guidance. OGE's proactive role in setting standards, providing training, and issuing advisory opinions is essential and would be difficult to replicate through other means.

Definitions for the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP), a retirement savings program for federal employees and uniformed services members. Establishes terminology for account types, contribution sources, investment funds, and administrative procedures.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it provides essential definitions for a federal retirement savings program that millions of federal employees and military personnel rely on for their retirement security. The TSP offers low-cost investment options and tax advantages that would be difficult to replicate through individual arrangements.

Federal regulation governing Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) loan program for federal employees, defining loan terms, eligibility, repayment, interest rates, and tax implications

Creates costly bureaucratic compliance burden with complex rules that distort retirement savings decisions; free market alternatives would provide better options without government-mandated structure

Regulates how TSP accounts are divided in divorce/separation, establishing procedures for court orders and legal processes to access retirement funds for alimony, child support, and court fees, with specific calculation methods and fee structures.

Americans would be worse off if this regulation was deleted because it provides essential legal mechanisms for fair division of retirement assets during divorce/separation, ensuring former spouses and children receive court-ordered financial support without requiring complex litigation to access locked retirement funds.