What, Not How
The Swedes have a better approach to construction regulation than we do.
Prescriptive versus Performance Codes
Who knew that Sweden had a more reasonable approach to regulation than the US? Not me.
‘But the most remarkable difference between the United States and Sweden is regulatory. Building codes in the U.S. try to make buildings safe by prescribing exactly what materials must be used and how (a prescriptive code). In Sweden, the government does this by setting goals and letting builders come up with a way to achieve them (a performance code).
‘So, for instance, U.S. building codes dictate the thickness of drywall that must be used for fire resistance, how many layers are needed and how many nails are required to attach it. In Sweden, the code requires that a wall must resist burning for two hours, say, and lets engineers and manufacturers figure out how to accomplish that. The regulator’s job is to check the engineer’s work.’
Mpox Vaccines Stuck in Limbo: WHO is at Fault
The WHO, sitting fat and happy in their Swiss enclaves, can’t seem to get their arms around a disease with pandemic effect in Africa.
I’ve said it before. Bureaucracy kills.
‘Unfortunately, a new Mpox variant is now spreading in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and nearby countries. Here’s the crazy part: despite declaring Mpox a public health emergency on August 14, the WHO has not approved any Mpox vaccines. You might think, “Who cares what the WHO authorizes?” After all, the FDA, EMA, and the UK have all granted emergency approval. But here’s the catch: the WHO’s approval is crucial for GAVI, the vaccine alliance that donates vaccines to developing countries. Without WHO approval, GAVI is reluctant to provide vaccines to the Congo. To add insult to injury, the Congo itself has approved the Jynneos and LC16 vaccines. Yet, the WHO refuses to authorize and GAVI to donate these vaccines, citing vague concerns about safety and efficacy.’
Sorry, Elon, But Businesses Rely on Regulation
If big businesses rely on regulations for certainty and regulators have sought to destabilize the regulatory environment with novel and aggressive approaches, then shock approaches to deregulation may not be as expensive as they first appear.
They’ll still be expensive. But the opportunity cost of tolerating the status quo (an assumption upon which this intrusive regulators may rely) is skyrocketing.
‘If those and other agencies were stripped of their staffs, a lot of US businesses would be paralyzed. You might argue that this fact is itself proof that there is too much regulation, but the fact remains. Shutting down a large chunk of the federal regulatory apparatus would make it harder, not easier, for the private sector. Furthermore, regulation would give way to litigation, and the judiciary is not obviously more efficient than the bureaucracy.
‘There is a precedent for elimination of an entire agency, but it is limited in applicability. It took more than six years, but in 1985 the federal government abolished the Civil Aeronautics Board as part of a larger law that deregulated the airline industry. The result was lower fares, more competition and improved airline safety. In the absence of the CAB, there was still enough of a coherent legal permission structure to allow the airlines to keep flying.’
To solve homelessness, we need an entrepreneurial approach, not more bureaucracy
Is social entrepreneurship really that different from bureaucracy in practice?
‘Having a single point of contact, coordination, and accountability could be useful. But only if this office has the right mandate and takes a practical, entrepreneurial approach. A social entrepreneurial approach is vital if the crisis is to be met. Social entrepreneurs share some characteristics with conventional entrepreneurs, such as resourcefulness, pragmatism and persistence, but instead of working for profits, they focus on achieving positive social outcomes.
‘A social entrepreneur who can identify and mobilize the various components of a response in a timely way would be a promising start. They would have to have access to the necessary places in government, the ability to second staff, and the money to initiate activity. They would need the capacity and the gumption to find ways over and around systemic hurdles, and the insight to see when a less-than-perfect solution is workable enough to get us through the short term while we continue to work on better, longer-term fixes.’
Conservative law’s new superstar has a familiar name: Scalia
Eugene Scalia is in the vanguard of the backlash against overzealous regulators.
Imagine if someone were to appoint him to the Supreme Court. He’s only 61 years old.
‘Scalia has clashed particularly frequently with the SEC, where chair Gary Gensler has promulgated 41 new rules aimed at increasing transparency and protecting investors. Scalia and his clients contend the agency has repeatedly overstepped its legal authority on issues ranging from private fund disclosure to the rules for hedge funds and traders operating in the US Treasury market. The SEC said: “We act within the law and how courts interpret the law.”’
As newspapers close, local corruption thrives
A free independent press, committed to investigative journalism, acts as a natural check to the baser instincts of those at the helm of our bureaucracies.
When the press goes away, for whatever reason, these myopic nabobs are emboldened. This leads to more federal prosecution.
‘Our analysis uses a difference-in-difference design. We compare districts that experienced a major newspaper closure to those that didn’t, while accounting for differences between them prior to these closures. We found that in districts where a major daily newspaper closed, there was a 7.3 per cent increase in the number of cases filed. These effects were not due to changes in the cohort of elected officials, nor due to changes in the coverage of government officials within the newspaper. This implies that the increase is not driven by the vetting or auditing functions of newspapers. The results suggested that corrupt officials may be emboldened by the closure, only to be ensnared by federal law enforcement. We supplemented these findings by replicating the results in Brazil, where we see a similar increase in corruption following closures of newspapers.’