Four-term U.S. Sen. Dianne
Feinstein (D-California) is seeking re-election this year, and 14
Republicans are lining up to challenge her. The choice of the
Golden State’s Republican bigwigs is the nonprofit executive
Elizabeth Emken, who is the subject of my
print column in the current issue of Reason. 

In the FlashReport, Jon Fleischman continues his “ongoing effort
to bring original, thoughtful commentary” by publishing
Emken’s policy paper on regulation. 

I didn’t have too many kind words for Emken, and I’m voting for
Rick Williams in next week’s primary. A few Emken supporters have
written in to challenge my characterization of the candidate as
weak tea. (Andrew Sullivan on the other hand
says the piece was insufficiently zealous in its praise of
America’s sovereign ruler.) So in the interest of fairness, let me
say that while Emken’s policy paper didn’t knock my socks off, it
is way better than anything coming out of Feinstein lately. Some
samples: 

Does it surprise anyone that a recent video revealed an EPA
official comparing his agency’s methods of dealing with
non-compliance with crucifixion?

This same story is happening every day, all over the country.
Thanks to over-taxation, over-regulation and over-litigation,
American companies are at a distinct competitive disadvantage. It’s
much easier to do business everywhere else but here, so if we’re
worried about “saving the environment,” let’s keep America’s
business environment in mind when we’re making those decisions.

The simple truth is that our economy will be more
productive when our political class removes the barriers to
growth.

The annual cost of federal regulations in the United States
increased to more than $1.75 trillion, according to a study
commissioned by the Small Business Administration.  That’s
equal to 12% of our entire economy.  If every U.S. household
had to pay an equal share of the federal regulatory burden, each of
us would owe $15,586…

For example, an “economically significant regulation” is one
that will cost more than $100 million.  From 1998 to 2007,
federal agencies announced between 50 and 80 major regulations per
year.  Today, federal agencies have proposed 219 economically
significant regulations. That’s over two and a half times the
number of regulations from 5 years ago that will end up costing
American taxpayers more than $100 million each.

In terms of total regulations, in each of the last three years
more than 3,500 new regulations were adopted.  At this very
moment, there are 4,257 new regulations in the pipeline. That’s the
only pipeline I can think of that absolutely needs to be turned
down.

I remain underwhelmed by
Emken’s intellectual thrust. Over what period did the annual cost
of regulations increase to $1.75 trillion – Feinstein’s time in
office, the 21st century so far, the Obama Administration, or some
other time frame? And the none-too-witty wordplay gets in the way
of making actual points: Instead of the single-and-a-half entendre
embedded in that “environment/business environment” line, how about
noting that the supposed tension between vigorous capitalism and a
sound environment is false, as should be clear to anybody who’s
visited a third world cement factory or a dried-up
post-Soviet lake? 

Still, the alternative to Emken’s is DiFi’s view that we

need more regulation, that we
need it without delay, and that the only thing holding back
America’s hens is the lack of a
national laying standard set by Big Egg. 

Emken’s policy proposal: 

Place a moratorium on new regulations exceeding $100 million
except for cases of national security and repeal all recently
enacted regulations exceeding $100 million unless they pass
rigorous benefit tests.

Emken detractors have lately been
playing up her role as a lobbyist in the Obamacare debate. (She
wanted to get autism coverage added but says she didn’t support the
PPACA itself.)
This video skirts the outside border of reality by calling her
an “Obamacare lobbyist.” A supporter of universal health care with
an individual mandate can be the Republican presidential candidate,
but apparently there are still some standards in the
Senate.