OCR Text |
Show Regulatory Burden Must Be Ligh r Regulatory "reform" has now joined tax "reform" as a subject all public officials, economists econ-omists and businessmen can favor without ever seeming to agree on what is being discussed or more important, what should be done To the businessman "reform" means limiting limit-ing regulations to those providing reasonable assurance that products and services are sate to produce and use and to making sure that all business dealings are ethical and honest. Most businessmen retain their faith that competitive enterprise provides the most effective regulatory regula-tory force in the public interest. The public is well protected because no one buys a bad product or service twice and because good products and services become the best sellers. Businessmen rightly resent spending large sums in an effort to understand and comply with often contradictory and useless bureaucratic mandates. Since every company and every community have wide differences, government rules dannot be written to apply equitably to all and to achieve what competition in the marketplace has achieved so remarkably during dur-ing our economic history. When public officials speak of regulatory "reform," they usually mean improving the administration of regulations which exist. They seldom face the question of whether the rule should be on the books in the first place. They are interested in eliminating governmental waste (a laudable goal), not the waste in what business calls the high costs of compliance, costs which are passed on to consumers. No two economists seem to have duplicate views on any subject, let alone regulatory "reform." "re-form." Many of them are primarily concerned about who does the regulating, not whether. Should it be the federal, state or local governments? govern-ments? Should there be a separate agency for each function? Or would a super agency help avoid duplication? Is self-regulation effective as practiced in the professions of medicine and law or will government controls provide the most public protection at the lowKI These questions can be debated endliy ' most of us don't care. As taxpayers, voters, and shoppers,, ever, we all have the same interest in ! tory "reform." All our experience shoi the public fares best when there is the p. f possible freedom of competition and tht- : mum possible governmental regulation HUGHES SLAMS GOVERNMENTS "FREE'1 ADVICE Dr. Jay Hughes, Republican Republi-can candidate for Congress in Utahs Second District, the seat now held by Allan Howe, said today the government govern-ment "is giving away far too muchfree' advice." Speaking before a group of interested citizens, Dr. Hughes pointed out that the government has 1,267 federal advisory committees whose only purpose is to give advice. "In 1975 it cost American taxpayers over fifty m illion dollars for some 25, 000 experts to compile 'important' information for the benefit of the American people. These experts average ave-rage over $145.00 a day for their services. Their efforts ar e published in some 275 consumer information bulletins. bul-letins. Some of these are available at no charge while others can be had for as little as 25? or as much as $2.60." |