announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: we have dan bosch here to talk about the regulations of the new administration. you for joining us, sir. guest: thank you for having me.

host: remind people particularly about the view you take and how you view these regulations. guest: i think i can actually talk about the think tank dedicated to free market vote. when we do regulation, we like to look at -- look at it through the lens of how it imposes upon the economy and how agencies do a better job of making sure these are efficient, if they need to impose those laws. host: a four-part that your organization just put out on the topic of regulation and it is probably something that not everybody dives into everyday. what he think it is a board for people to understand the conduct of this administration? guest: it really gives a sense of the economic impact being had and it -- being handed down by the administration. in the report, we looked at the first chair of the wyden administration and found they imposed $201 billion of economic

impositions. the biden administration is by far the biggest first year of an administration in that timeframe. when you consider the fact that typically what happens during the first chair of administration is that they are laying the groundwork for more substantive rule to come in the future, i think is a clear indication of the future where we are headed that there will be more economic costs coming. host: you mentioned the $201 billion number found in your report. you also mention a number of executive orders being signed and the topics of vehicle admissions and covid-19 safety measures. can you elaborate on what those things? guest: the vehicle admissions rule is probably about 90% of the net total. that is probably about $180 billion. that sets miles per gallon

standards per year from 2023 to 2026. most people are familiar with the mandate from osha on employers of more than 100 employees to either vaccinate or provide testing for them. that was about $4 billion. that one was recently swept down by the supreme court. host: as far as the paperwork involved, talk a little bit about that. you talk about financial facts, but what does this paperwork have to do with it overall? guest: paperwork is put a simple. time is money. when you look at the amount of paperwork hours that were issued last year, 131 million hours of paperwork were added. if you figure out that hourly cost for each person that is doing that work, there is significant economic costs involving that. host: before we go too far, as far as the regulation is concerned, this is the technical definition. i will ask you to expand on it. it says the regulation is a

border commission with the force and effect of law. congress and other authorities can sometimes require agencies to issue regulation. they had the discretion to do so. many passed by congress give them the chance to decide how best ample metals laws. the regulations specify the -- is that me as far as folks like you tracking these things, not only for its economic impact, but overall impact on america? guest: i think what it means is that ultimately, if the look at where these come from. as you mentioned, congress does give agencies the permission to do certain things. there's also authority decades ago that was given to agencies.

what we're saying now is that with congress doing less in terms of actual legislating, agencies are being forced to try to address the issues that are topical today and they are trying to shoehorn in these regulations into authorities that are decades old that were not actually designed to allow these regulations to be well implement it. i think the impact that folks feel is that you end up with a sufficient regulation as a result of it. one unique thing about regulation is that it does take time for these things to actually be dealt in the future. is not like in agency issues a roll today and your viewers will feel the impact tomorrow. it is typically years down the road, like higher prices of goods and services. host: give us an example, say on the previous administration on that front. guest: i think the most per gallon rule that i mentioned is

something the biden administration put out, that affects 2023 to 2026. obviously, the vehicles are not out yet. if your viewers were to go purchase a vehicle over that timeframe, my fine costs are low bit higher than they are expecting to pay. host: our guest is with us from the american action forum, talking about the topic of regulation. if you want to ask him questions about the findings and reports, you can call (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 (202) 748-8000 --(202) 748-8002 for independents. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003. guest: the philosophy is that there are number of things that need to be addressed, eggs from

the covered pandemic to climate change, to certain labor issues. they believe that the government can do that job by issuing regulations to accomplish that. their approach is to use the existing authority that we have under law to try to issue solutions to these problems and then to take those solutions and provide -- i guess the best way to put it is to use the government to provide the best solution possible that they are able to do. often what happens, and i sort of mentioned this earlier, the efficiency of regulation is not there compared to some of the different policy approaches that they could use. what you end up with is inefficient, costly regulation that really does not actually address the problem at the end of the day. host: as far as the process

itself, just for folks to understand at home, what is the process of putting a regulation into effect? guest: i think that is part of why relation is so inefficient and ineffective. what happens is the agency has to propose the rule. they will publish that and allow the public to comment on it. then, they have to take those comments and reconsider the rule that the issued in light of those comments, address those comments and a final rule. that process can take years because there is also, even before rule is approach, there is a lot of economic that has be done to figure out if we are even coming close to regulating this in the right way. it is a very time-consuming process. one thing to keep in mind, and something we just all with the supreme court recently striking down the osha vaccine mandate,

is that it can be challenged in court. even if a rule is issued, it can be several years before it actually goes into effect and clears the court and is felt by folks. host: the story just took place yesterday. it is about the biden administration saying that there will be mercury pollution rules reinstated that were weakened under trump. guest: it is a good illustration of another unique feature of regulatory possible -- regulatory legislation. the biden administration is proposing to rollback a trump rule. it is a problem for a certainty standpoint for businesses and everybody, really. i think everybody should be concerned about that. because these things are not

being done through congress, they are sort of help to the whims of whoever is in the white house at the time. host: the report that is available online, there are several charts to take a look at it. there is a total cost by month. we are showing folks the chart, but it is showing a spike in month 11 of mr. biden's first european can you describe that and the impact? guest: that is the motor vehicle ruled dimension. that is $180 billion. $201 billion is showing that that is 90% of it. we did not expect that rule to come out in the first year. usually the first year is when the administration is laying the groundwork for more substantive relate run. it was sort of a surprise to see that come out when it did. we will probably -- it will

probably be one of the most excessive regulations will see during his entire time and it is by far the most expensive individual rule that we have tracked going all the way back to 2005. host: basic flatline in the trump administration, the obama ministration -- administration showing a late a small spike. guest: like i say, it is the ramping up sort of phase. it was unique with the biden administration that they put out this role. they published it on the last day of 2021. within the last few weeks of the first year in office, they put this rule out. host: here is evan in maryland, and independent line. you are on with our guest, stan bosch -- dan bosch. caller: i just went to make a quick comment and i'm kind of disappointed in this administration for seeming to push the effort of emissions control onto citizens we don't seem to have any sort of strict

admissions -- emissions when it comes to shipping low-end consumer goods from china on ships with bunker oil. is that seem appropriate -- does that seem appropriate? guest: i think the problem with regulating these emissions is that they have to be done as a sort of one-off basis. to be done by industry, by source. as i mentioned earlier, it takes forever to regulate all the things you need to regulate, then it an efficient way to do it. something that would be better something that prices carbon into the market, something like a carbon tax or some other kind of pricing mechanism would be better and more evenly distribute the cost. i realize you mentioned things related to what china might be doing. it is to that she is difficult

for the u.s. government to regulate anything that has to do with what another country might be doing. host: from christian in organ, democrat line, good morning. you are next. caller: the morning. dan bosch, correct? guest: yes. caller: i have a couple questions for you. i am looking at the tag at the bottom, american action forum. out of curiosity, i'm not very sure about the american action forum. i'm assuming they pay your salary, is that correct? guest: yes, i am an employee there. caller: that's right. in regards to regulation, hello? there is a reason the epa has set standards for drinking water, pollution that gets pumped out in the sky, right? it is regulated, right?

guest: sure. caller: wouldn't that be a problem? there is a reason they have relations, right? guest: i'm not advocating for getting rid of regulations, especially like the safety of drinking water. the only point that i'm trying to raise through this research and other research that we do here is that it is a trade-off. we need to consider the economic impacts the risks to health and public safety. it is all about finding the right balance to have regulations. it is not that all regulations are bad or things like that, it is just that we need to find the right balance. host: how is that balance achieved and what is it look like? guest: specifically when indices -- industries try to find that balance, they look at the cost indexes and they consider what the benefits will be. that is a fair approach to doing

it. but one interesting aspect of it is that since agencies are doing that, they are sort of incentivized to maybe underreport the cost and then they are sort of incentivized to not necessarily inflate benefits, but find as many as possible, even if they are not directly related to the regulation. it is kind of a tricky balance. they try to do the best they can with the resources they have, but it is all about finding that right benefit -- right balance of cost and benefits. host: melissa in iowa, independent line. caller: hi, things for taking my call. i guess i have a really funny regulation question to dan brashear. explain to us why the biden administration put in a regulation that you can be an illegal alien, kill people, are suppose to be deported for that,

and they give them leniency to be able to stay here. that is totally, totally wrong. guest: i appreciate the question. i'm not sure i'm familiar with that specific regulation that they put forward that allows that to happen, but certainly the agencies have to do what they think is best for the country. they are trying to find the right balance of what is an appropriate level of immigration and why it is important for our economy. they need to work on those kinds of issues. host: we have a question of twitter. there were so many regulations strip roi by the previous administration that nothing is safe, from our wallets to our drinking water to our politicians. president biden is trying to bring some security and our lives by controlling the predators the right protects. as far as the previous administration, is that accurate? guest: he certainly put an

emphasis on direct elation, but i don't think it's fair to say that's entirely the case. if you look at their final numbers, they actually invoked for the billion dollars in cost throughout their four years. it's not like they were cutting away everything. they were so regulating as well. host: the second point, as far as mr. biden and the idea of security and protection, the new regulations set that you talk about, what about that prospect? guest: i would just caution folks to think that often people say that we need galatian for this. they think this will be the ideal solution. oftentimes, regulation is not the ideal solution. it could be part of the solution, specifically because people tend to think regulation is a utopian decision and it is really a compromise, like any other policy, about finding the right balance. host: if not regulation, what other ways could you achieve the

same results? guest: congress could step in. one thing they could do to help these agencies is given the authorities they need to regulate things in a better way. a good example is the epa uses the clean air act to regulate climate emissions. it was designed for those kind of things. it is not a sort of one-off industry regulation, whereas a broader authority that might limit the epa to the emissions they are allowed to regulate put some guardrails ro

>> johnson's secretaries knew because they were tasked with transcribing many of those conversations. in fact, they were the ones who made sure that the conversations were taped. as johnson would signal to them through an open door between his office and theirs. >> you'll also hear some blunt talk. >> presidential recordings. find it on the c-span now mobile app. or wherever you get your podcasts.

>> washington unfiltered. she's been in your pocket. download c-span out today. -- download c-span now today. wednesday, a discussion on russian and ukraine tension. a discussion with lawmakers and others on the helsinki commission. live coverage at 2:30 p.m. eastern on c-span three, online at c-span.org, or watchful coverage on our new video apple card -- video app. >> president biden spoke with reporters about the qualifications he is seeking in a nominee to replace stephen breyer. as remarks came just before a meeting with the top democrat and republican on the senate judiciary committee. vice president kamala harris also attended.