Browse regulations

This regulation (23 CFR Part 420) prescribes administrative requirements for State DOTs and MPOs using Federal Highway Administration planning and research funds (SPR, PL, NHS, STP, MG). It mandates work program submission and FHWA approval, sets 25% RD&D spending minimums for SPR funds, governs fund distribution formulas, requires extensive reporting and monitoring, and compels compliance with numerous other federal regulations regarding procurement, audits, nondiscrimination, disadvantaged business enterprises, drug-free workplaces, and more.

This regulation exemplifies unconstitutional federal overreach via conditional spending, commandeering state transportation planning and research through bureaucratic control. The hidden compliance burden—work programs, approvals, reports, audits, and adherence to dozens of federal administrative rules—constitutes a massive hidden tax on states, distortions that raise barriers to innovation and efficient resource allocation. Transportation planning and R&D are quintessential state and local concerns under the Tenth Amendment; federal conditional funding coerces states into one-size-fits-all procedures that ignore local knowledge and priorities. The regulation's unseen costs—administrative overhead, delayed projects, compliance complexity, and suppressed experimentation—dwarf any marginal coordination benefits. Repeal would restore state autonomy, reduce bureaucracy, and allow transportation dollars to serve actual needs rather than federal paperwork mandates.

This regulation governs public access to meetings of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, establishing requirements for open meetings, exceptions for classified or sensitive information, advance notice provisions, voting procedures for closing meetings, and record-keeping requirements including transcripts of closed sessions.

This regulation creates costly bureaucratic compliance burdens and unnecessary paperwork requirements for a federal agency that could operate more efficiently without mandated public meeting procedures. The extensive disclosure requirements and transcript maintenance impose administrative overhead that diverts resources from the agency's actual mission while providing minimal public benefit beyond what would naturally occur through normal government transparency practices.

BBG regulations implementing the Privacy Act of 1974 provide individuals rights to access and amend personal records, restrict disclosures without consent, establish an Access Appeal Committee, and outline fee structures with specific exemptions.

Creates bureaucratic overhead (dedicated office, appeal committee, 20/30-day timelines), restricts efficient information sharing via consent requirements, imposes compliance burdens on agency operations, and diverts resources from core broadcasting mission for marginal privacy gains given broad statutory exemptions.

This regulation establishes the Broadcasting Board of Governors' (BBG) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) procedures, defining how the agency handles public requests for records, including request procedures, fee structures, exemptions, and appeal processes for denied requests.

This FOIA regulation ensures government transparency and public access to information, which is essential for democratic accountability. Citizens need this mechanism to monitor government operations, hold officials accountable, and access information that affects their lives. The regulation balances public access with legitimate privacy and security concerns.

USAID debt collection regulation enabling administrative wage garnishment (up to 15% without court order), credit reporting, interest/penalties, and referral to Treasury/DOJ for delinquent debts, with limited agency review.

It permits property deprivation without judicial due process, violates federalism by extending a foreign aid agency's reach to state/local governments, imposes compounding financial burdens that trap debtors, and creates an unchecked administrative collection system antithetical to limited government.

The Thomas R. Pickering Fellowship provides grants to undergraduate/graduate students (up to $250,000) and post-secondary institutions (up to $1,000,000) to increase awareness of and recruitment into the Foreign Service. Fellows must complete coursework, maintain satisfactory GPA, pass background/medical checks, and accept Foreign Service employment for 1.5 years per year of funding.

Federal subsidies for education violate constitutional federalism—education is a state/local matter under the Tenth Amendment. This program distorts career incentives by picking winners through grants, transferring wealth from taxpayers to selected students, and expanding bureaucracy under the guise of recruitment. The Foreign Service can attract talent through competitive salaries and prestige without this market-distorting intervention. Eliminating it restores limited government and free enterprise while reducing federal entanglement in education.

Rules governing international commercial arbitration procedures under the Inter-American Convention, establishing tribunal composition, procedures, evidence rules, and cost allocation mechanisms.

Provides essential framework for international commercial dispute resolution that facilitates cross-border trade and investment by offering predictable, neutral arbitration procedures.

Requires manufacturers of Class II/III medical devices meeting criteria (serious failure risk, >1 year implant, life-supporting outside facilities, pediatric use) to conduct FDA-ordered postmarket surveillance. Mandates plan submission within 30 days, up to 36 months monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting. Non-compliance renders device misbranded and subject to enforcement.

Deletion would eliminate proactive safety monitoring for high-risk implanted and life-supporting devices, leaving public vulnerable to unforeseen adverse events. Manufacturers lack market incentive to undertake costly long-term surveillance voluntarily; tort system alone is reactive and cannot prevent widespread harm before injuries occur. This targeted regime addresses information asymmetry and negative externalities, a function private actors cannot efficiently perform.

This regulation requires electronic registration through FERC's website for various activities including submission of documents, forms, reports, tariffs, and receipt of service in FERC proceedings. A waiver process exists for those showing good cause for inability to register electronically, with waivers valid for one year. The Commission may also accept communications from unregistered persons when registration offers no value.

This regulation imposes unnecessary bureaucratic burdens without sufficient justification. The electronic-only requirement excludes individuals and small businesses lacking reliable internet access or technical skills, creating a participation barrier in FERC proceedings. The waiver process acknowledges the rule's deficiencies while adding administrative complexity. This exemplifies regulatory overreach—a solution in search of a problem that increases compliance costs and may deter citizen engagement, contrary to principles of limited government and open regulatory participation.

FERC's integrated licensing process mandates extensive pre-application consultation with dozens of federal, state, and tribal agencies, detailed environmental documentation, public notification, and free distribution of all materials to government entities. It creates a complex, multi-year bureaucratic process for obtaining hydropower licenses.

This regulation imposes exorbitant compliance costs and multi-year delays that function as a hidden tax on energy production, raising consumer electricity prices. Small businesses and startups face disproportionate burdens, while established corporations benefit from barriers to entry. Mandatory consultation with dozens of agencies enables regulatory capture and mission creep beyond constitutional authority. Excessive documentation requirements duplicate state processes and violate federalism principles, with unseen costs including forgone energy projects and suppressed economic growth that dwarf any environmental benefits.

The Safeguards Rule under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act mandates financial institutions under FTC jurisdiction to implement comprehensive information security programs including risk assessments, encryption, multi-factor authentication, access controls, employee training, service provider oversight, and incident response planning. It applies to a broad range of entities including mortgage lenders, payday lenders, tax preparers, and even career counselors serving financial industry professionals.

Imposes crushing compliance costs ($2 trillion+ nationwide) on small firms 30% higher than large corporations, creating barriers to entry that protect incumbents. Security is best handled by market forces and case law (common law torts, breach liability) rather than one-size-fits-all federal mandates. States can experiment with tailored approaches. The FTC's expansive definition of 'financial institution' to include tax preparers and travel agencies demonstrates regulatory mission creep far beyond any reasonable connection to financial stability. Market discipline through reputation and liability for breaches creates stronger incentives without destroying competition.

Procedural rules governing the Air Transportation Stabilization Board, a temporary federal board created post-9/11 to administer airline loan guarantees. Defines membership, meeting procedures, staff roles, and incorporates Treasury regulations for FOIA, lobbying restrictions, and debarment.

This regulatory part codifies a temporary emergency board established after 9/11 that completed its crisis mission over 20 years ago. Maintaining it perpetuates unnecessary bureaucracy, creates hidden compliance costs, and risks future mission creep. The board's enabling statute was time-bound to an extraordinary emergency; its procedural rules have no ongoing justification and should be repealed to reduce regulatory bloat and respect the principle that emergency powers must expire when the crisis ends.

Establishes procedures for NASA's monetary awards program for scientific and technical contributions with significant value in aeronautical and space activities. Covers eligibility, application requirements, three award types (Patent Application, Software Release, Tech Brief), review by the Inventions and Contributions Board, reconsideration process, and payment procedures. Awards are based on criteria including contribution value, development costs, and prior compensation, with amounts at Administrator's discretion.

Uses taxpayer funds for discretionary awards creating perverse incentives to seek government favor over market validation; administrative overhead and subjective evaluation represent misallocation of scarce resources. Rewards should emerge from private mechanisms (patents, contracts, market adoption) rather than bureaucratic patronage, preserving liberty and preventing regulatory capture.

Regulates qualification, maintenance, and use of flight simulation training devices (FSTDs) for pilot training and certification. Requires FAA-approved sponsors, quality management systems, regular FAA-conducted evaluations, validation data packages, detailed records, and specific operational standards to ensure simulator fidelity.

Prescriptive process requirements impose substantial compliance costs that disproportionately burden small flight training providers, stifling competition and inflating pilot training costs. The regime reflects regulatory capture by incumbent simulator manufacturers and airlines, protecting them from market competition while delivering diminishing safety returns. Performance-based standards enforced via insurance, tort liability, and airline due diligence could achieve necessary safety outcomes more efficiently, allowing innovation and reducing unnecessary administrative burdens that restrict supply of qualified pilots.

Regulation establishes capital classification system and early intervention framework for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Enterprises) overseen by OFHEO. Sets capital thresholds (minimum, critical, risk-based), triggers supervisory responses when financial indicators decline, restricts capital distributions, mandates capital restoration plans, and grants OFHEO broad discretionary authority to classify, reclassify, and take enforcement actions.

This regulation perpetuates government-sponsored monopolies that distort the mortgage market and create moral hazard. OFHEO's broad discretionary powers invite regulatory capture and undermine rule of law, while compliance costs are passed to consumers. True financial safety requires ending government sponsorship, not micromanaging it. The regulation is an expensive band-aid on a self-inflicted wound.