Great post! One little clarification: zoning is generally in the purview of local governments, not states (which makes it worse - capacity is a *huge* issue at the local level). There’s a great project underway to digitize these regulations: https://www.zoningatlas.org/. Hopefully the first step in the sort of process you describe here.
I'd love to see some state introduce a zoning simplification, where they simply stop letting localities do _whatever_. Offer a much more limited menu of zone types, and then tell cities that they need to update their maps to conform in the next five years. (This would look more like what Japan does.)
I think that would require repealing the state enabling statute. I’m a little bit surprised that nobody talks about that, but I guess most planners would see that as the beginning of the end of the profession.
FWIW I’m a planner and would be interested in revisiting these foundations.
Policy clutter is the hidden nightmare of policy implementation. Sometimes clutter is caused with the best of intentions. A small change is made because of regulatory and political constraints make comprehensive changes impossible. These small changes are then never pruned for utility and not considered in context of how multiple small changes affect the entire system.
This is compounded by fear of change. The idea that if we make a change, are we making a mistake or I fought hard for that, I don't want to give it up? They forget that the status quo is working poorly, and is a mistake itself.
Then there are people that benefit from complexity. They have the ability to navigate the system better than anyone else because they understand it.
Finally, legislators don't have press conferences for legislation that simplifies a program. Simplification isn't something easily quantified or understood, and it is a lot of hard work. Using STARA to inventory elements of a vast regulatory network could be very beneficial.
I experienced all of these problems (except for the last one) in a non-regulatory effort when I oversaw a project to redesign and simplify the SNAP (Food Stamps) eligibility documents in California. I'm sure that if this were a regulatory effort, the stakes would be much higher and the intransigence would be even worse.
Of course this type of work shouldn't be confused with the DOGE/Trump effort to reduce regulations. They really just want to eliminate programs they don't like.
Of course this type of work shouldn't be confused with the DOGE/Trump effort to reduce regulations. They really just want to eliminate programs they don't like.
"
Actually i'm sure it's both.
And there's nothing wrong with getting rid of programs you don't like assuming you do it lawfully
A big source of this is how hard it is to enact legislation that ACTUALLY does something. So lawmakers find it much easier to pass performative legislation that directs agencies to do "virtue signalling" (and I say the term in a bipartisan manner, Trump's EO on plastic straws is as much virtue signalling as liberals banning travel to states that have bathroom bans. Red state bans on vendors refusing to do business with Israel is another example on the right). So we end up with a lot of boxes to check for agencies that don't do anything but add paperwork, and additional Congressional studies that no one reads.
Good piece. The one that jumps out to me lately is Conference policies. Like a lot of agencies after the GSA Conference Scandal (https://www.govexec.com/management/2015/01/where-are-they-now-where-players-gsa-scandal-have-landed/103743/) we instituted a conference policy which required a bunch of approvals for conferences. Now, I don't think that was necessary, what should have happened was everyone went 'yep, that was waste/fraud, the people who did it need to be disciplined/fired' but whatever. The main problem is that rather than limiting it to conference hosting, which was the problem, they stuck attendance on there too, then stole a definition from the DOD's Joint Travel Regulation that meant basically anything you travel for and pay a registration fee for is a conference...
So many trainings are conferences and require SES signature. Finally, after about 13 years, they're trying to roll that back, no approval required to attend non-Agency conferences, so long as the cost and attendees are below a specific threshold...which I'm sure made sense to folks, but now means that I've got people who are trying to rebuild the entire thing we're trying to shut down (tracking everyone's attendance at random trainings through a weird, ad hoc third system rather than either the training or travel systems) on the basis that 'well, we can't know if we blow those limits unless we track all attendees and costs, right?'
Excellent overview! You've nailed a large and growing problem in all levels of governance. If there is one area where AI might save human kind, it's sorting through these reams of Policy conflicts and plotting a clearer path. Another area is perhaps consolidating Council/Legislature meeting agenda. No one in their most ambitious desire to make decisions should have to contend with a meeting Agenda thousands of pages long.
Great post! One little clarification: zoning is generally in the purview of local governments, not states (which makes it worse - capacity is a *huge* issue at the local level). There’s a great project underway to digitize these regulations: https://www.zoningatlas.org/. Hopefully the first step in the sort of process you describe here.
I'd love to see some state introduce a zoning simplification, where they simply stop letting localities do _whatever_. Offer a much more limited menu of zone types, and then tell cities that they need to update their maps to conform in the next five years. (This would look more like what Japan does.)
I think that would require repealing the state enabling statute. I’m a little bit surprised that nobody talks about that, but I guess most planners would see that as the beginning of the end of the profession.
FWIW I’m a planner and would be interested in revisiting these foundations.
Policy clutter is the hidden nightmare of policy implementation. Sometimes clutter is caused with the best of intentions. A small change is made because of regulatory and political constraints make comprehensive changes impossible. These small changes are then never pruned for utility and not considered in context of how multiple small changes affect the entire system.
This is compounded by fear of change. The idea that if we make a change, are we making a mistake or I fought hard for that, I don't want to give it up? They forget that the status quo is working poorly, and is a mistake itself.
Then there are people that benefit from complexity. They have the ability to navigate the system better than anyone else because they understand it.
Finally, legislators don't have press conferences for legislation that simplifies a program. Simplification isn't something easily quantified or understood, and it is a lot of hard work. Using STARA to inventory elements of a vast regulatory network could be very beneficial.
I experienced all of these problems (except for the last one) in a non-regulatory effort when I oversaw a project to redesign and simplify the SNAP (Food Stamps) eligibility documents in California. I'm sure that if this were a regulatory effort, the stakes would be much higher and the intransigence would be even worse.
Of course this type of work shouldn't be confused with the DOGE/Trump effort to reduce regulations. They really just want to eliminate programs they don't like.
"
Of course this type of work shouldn't be confused with the DOGE/Trump effort to reduce regulations. They really just want to eliminate programs they don't like.
"
Actually i'm sure it's both.
And there's nothing wrong with getting rid of programs you don't like assuming you do it lawfully
Wow, very eye-opening!
A big source of this is how hard it is to enact legislation that ACTUALLY does something. So lawmakers find it much easier to pass performative legislation that directs agencies to do "virtue signalling" (and I say the term in a bipartisan manner, Trump's EO on plastic straws is as much virtue signalling as liberals banning travel to states that have bathroom bans. Red state bans on vendors refusing to do business with Israel is another example on the right). So we end up with a lot of boxes to check for agencies that don't do anything but add paperwork, and additional Congressional studies that no one reads.
Good piece. The one that jumps out to me lately is Conference policies. Like a lot of agencies after the GSA Conference Scandal (https://www.govexec.com/management/2015/01/where-are-they-now-where-players-gsa-scandal-have-landed/103743/) we instituted a conference policy which required a bunch of approvals for conferences. Now, I don't think that was necessary, what should have happened was everyone went 'yep, that was waste/fraud, the people who did it need to be disciplined/fired' but whatever. The main problem is that rather than limiting it to conference hosting, which was the problem, they stuck attendance on there too, then stole a definition from the DOD's Joint Travel Regulation that meant basically anything you travel for and pay a registration fee for is a conference...
So many trainings are conferences and require SES signature. Finally, after about 13 years, they're trying to roll that back, no approval required to attend non-Agency conferences, so long as the cost and attendees are below a specific threshold...which I'm sure made sense to folks, but now means that I've got people who are trying to rebuild the entire thing we're trying to shut down (tracking everyone's attendance at random trainings through a weird, ad hoc third system rather than either the training or travel systems) on the basis that 'well, we can't know if we blow those limits unless we track all attendees and costs, right?'
Excellent overview! You've nailed a large and growing problem in all levels of governance. If there is one area where AI might save human kind, it's sorting through these reams of Policy conflicts and plotting a clearer path. Another area is perhaps consolidating Council/Legislature meeting agenda. No one in their most ambitious desire to make decisions should have to contend with a meeting Agenda thousands of pages long.
Excellent post.
It's crazy to me We don't know things like how many federal crimes there are.
If LLMs did nothing else except make our laws and regulations make sense.They would be a huge win for humanity
Sing it, sister. When can I vote for you as my legislator?