Analysis of //EXECUTIVE ORDER Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies//
//February 18, 2025//

Response 1 -----------------------------------------------------------

Summary of the Executive Order

1. Policy and Purpose (Section 1):
• The order asserts that the Constitution vests all executive power in the President and emphasizes the need for accountability of executive branch officials to the President, who is directly accountable to the American people.
• It criticizes previous administrations for allowing independent regulatory agencies to operate with minimal presidential supervision, arguing that this undermines accountability and coherent execution of federal law.
• The order establishes a policy to ensure presidential supervision and control over the entire executive branch, including independent agencies.
2. Key Provisions:
• OIRA Review of Agency Regulations (Section 3): Requires all executive departments and agencies, including independent regulatory agencies, to submit significant regulatory actions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review before publication.
• Performance Standards and Management Objectives (Section 4): Directs the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to establish performance standards for independent agency heads and report on their performance to the President.
• Apportionments for Independent Regulatory Agencies (Section 5): Grants the OMB authority to review and adjust the budgets of independent regulatory agencies to align with the President’s policies and priorities.
• Consultation with the Executive Office of the President (Section 6): Requires independent regulatory agencies to consult with OMB and other White House offices, establish a White House Liaison position, and submit strategic plans for OMB clearance.
• Rules of Conduct for Federal Employees (Section 7): States that the President and the Attorney General’s interpretations of the law are controlling for all executive branch employees, limiting their ability to advance legal interpretations that contradict the President’s views.
3. Exemptions:
• The order explicitly exempts the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee from its provisions, except for the Federal Reserve’s supervision and regulation of financial institutions.

---

Potential Shifts of Control to the Executive Branch

This executive order significantly increases presidential control over the executive branch, particularly over independent regulatory agencies, which have traditionally operated with a degree of autonomy to ensure impartiality and expertise in their decision-making. Below are the key ways in which it shifts control to the executive branch:

1. Centralization of Regulatory Review:
• By requiring all significant regulatory actions to be reviewed by OIRA, the order brings independent agencies under direct presidential oversight. This could politicize regulatory decision-making, as agencies may feel pressured to align their actions with the President’s priorities rather than acting independently based on their expertise.
2. Budgetary Control Over Independent Agencies:
• The order grants the OMB authority to review and adjust the budgets of independent regulatory agencies, potentially allowing the President to influence or restrict their activities by withholding funding for specific projects or functions. This undermines the financial independence of these agencies.
3. Performance Standards and Strategic Plans:
• The requirement for OMB to establish performance standards and review strategic plans for independent agencies further subordinates these agencies to the President’s agenda, potentially compromising their ability to operate independently.
4. Legal Interpretation Controlled by the President:
• Section 7 mandates that the President and the Attorney General’s interpretations of the law are binding on all executive branch employees. This centralizes legal authority in the President, limiting the ability of agencies to interpret laws independently and potentially undermining checks and balances.
5. Increased White House Influence:
• The creation of White House Liaison positions within independent agencies and the requirement for regular consultation with White House offices further integrate these agencies into the President’s political orbit, eroding their traditional independence.

---

Concerns About Excessive Executive Control

1. Erosion of Agency Independence:
• Independent regulatory agencies, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), were created to operate free from political influence to ensure fair and impartial regulation. This order undermines their independence by subjecting them to presidential control.
2. Politicization of Regulation:
• By bringing regulatory actions under OIRA review and aligning agency budgets with the President’s priorities, the order risks politicizing regulatory decisions, which could lead to regulations that favor political interests over public welfare.
3. Undermining Checks and Balances:
• The order concentrates significant power in the executive branch, potentially weakening the system of checks and balances. By controlling legal interpretations, budgets, and regulatory actions, the President gains substantial influence over areas traditionally subject to congressional oversight or judicial review.
4. Impact on Expertise-Based Decision-Making:
• Independent agencies often rely on specialized expertise to make informed decisions. Subjecting their actions to presidential oversight could lead to decisions driven by political considerations rather than technical or scientific expertise.
5. Potential for Abuse of Power:
• The broad authority granted to the President under this order could be used to suppress regulatory actions that conflict with the administration’s agenda, even if those actions are in the public interest.

---

Conclusion

This executive order represents a significant shift of power to the executive branch by increasing presidential control over independent regulatory agencies. While it aims to improve accountability and coherence in federal regulation, it risks undermining the independence of these agencies, politicizing regulatory decision-making, and weakening the system of checks and balances. The long-term implications could include reduced public trust in regulatory agencies and a concentration of power in the presidency that challenges the constitutional balance of power.

Response 2 -----------------------------------------------------------

Assessment and Summary of the Executive Order

This executive order significantly expands presidential oversight and control over independent regulatory agencies, shifting the balance of power within the executive branch. It does so by requiring independent agencies to submit their significant regulatory actions for review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), a unit within the Executive Office of the President. Additionally, it grants the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) authority to establish performance standards for independent agency heads and influence their budgetary apportionments. The order also mandates regular consultation between independent agency leaders and the White House, including the appointment of White House Liaisons within these agencies.

Potential Ways It Shifts Too Much Control to the Executive Branch

1. Weakening the Independence of Regulatory Agencies
• Independent regulatory agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), have historically been insulated from direct presidential control to ensure impartial decision-making.
• By requiring these agencies to submit regulations for review by OIRA and by subjecting them to the OMB’s performance evaluations and budgetary oversight, the order undermines their independence.
2. Centralizing Regulatory Power in the Executive Office of the President (EOP)
• The requirement that independent agencies coordinate policies with White House councils (Domestic Policy Council, National Economic Council) effectively places regulatory decision-making under the influence of the President’s political agenda.
• This could result in regulations being shaped more by short-term political considerations rather than expert-driven policy.
3. Presidential Control Over Legal Interpretations
• The order establishes that the President and the Attorney General have the final say on all legal interpretations within the executive branch, prohibiting employees from advancing legal positions that contradict their views.
• This curtails agency legal autonomy and could enable the President to override longstanding legal interpretations in favor of politically motivated ones.
4. Budgetary Constraints as a Means of Control
• The OMB is given the power to adjust apportionments for independent agencies based on the President’s policies and priorities, potentially restricting their ability to function independently.
• This could be used to limit resources for agencies enforcing regulations that the administration opposes.
5. Undermining Checks and Balances
• Independent agencies were designed to act as a check on executive power, particularly in areas such as financial regulation, consumer protection, and election oversight.
• By consolidating control over these agencies, the order diminishes the separation of powers within the federal government.

Conclusion

This executive order significantly expands presidential authority over regulatory agencies that were designed to function with a degree of autonomy. By centralizing control over rulemaking, legal interpretations, and budgetary decisions, it blurs the line between independent agencies and traditional executive departments, shifting the balance of power toward the presidency. This shift raises concerns about the erosion of agency independence and the potential for regulatory decisions to become more politically driven rather than based on expert analysis and public interest.