Pushing Back on Ideology, Bureaucracy, and Costly Overreach: CRF’s Regulatory Work Last Week

Last week, the Center for Regulatory Freedom (CRF) submitted a series of regulatory comment letters addressing proposals across defense, healthcare, energy, environmental regulation, communications, housing, and intellectual property. While the subject matter varied, a consistent theme ran through each filing: federal regulation must be grounded in reality, law, and cost-benefit discipline—not ideology, unchecked bureaucracy, or assumptions divorced from real-world consequences.

CRF’s work focused on two central concerns. First, where ideology has crept into core government systems—particularly in the military—it must be removed in the interest of readiness and national security. Second, across domestic regulatory programs, excessive paperwork, delay, and administrative overreach are quietly driving up costs for families, seniors, and small businesses while weakening America’s economic and strategic position.

Restoring Objectivity and Discipline in Military Administration

CRF strongly supported the Department of War’s interim final rule reforming the military identification card and enrollment system. These comments were explicit: military administrative systems exist to support readiness, force protection, and mission execution—not to serve as vehicles for progressive gender ideology.

For several years, military personnel systems were pushed away from objective, sex-based records and toward subjective self-identification frameworks rooted in ideological concepts rather than operational necessity. CRF explained that this shift was not a harmless cultural gesture; it introduced ambiguity into systems that govern access control, medical readiness, benefits eligibility, and installation security.

When foundational data fields become subjective or contested, administrative friction increases, errors multiply, and frontline personnel are forced into roles they are neither trained nor resourced to perform.

CRF emphasized that military readiness depends on clarity, predictability, and institutional discipline.

Identification systems are not symbolic—they are operational infrastructure. Restoring objective, reality-based standards removes ideological disputes from personnel offices, reduces administrative burden, and allows commanders and support staff to focus on mission-critical tasks. The interim final rule appropriately reasserts that the military is not a laboratory for social experimentation, but a war-fighting institution whose administrative systems must serve national defense first.

Limiting EPA Paperwork That Raises Costs and Weakens Supply Chains

CRF submitted comments urging EPA and OMB to rein in excessive paperwork under the Toxic Substances Control Act, particularly in the premanufacture review process for new chemicals. While TSCA is a risk-management statute, CRF explained that it is increasingly being implemented as a paperwork-accumulation exercise that slows innovation without improving safety outcomes.

Overbroad information demands delay regulatory decisions, consume agency resources, and impose disproportionate costs on small and mid-sized manufacturers that lack compliance departments. Those costs do not disappear—they show up as higher prices for consumer goods, reduced domestic manufacturing capacity, and greater reliance on foreign supply chains. CRF stressed that disciplined information collection is essential not only for economic competitiveness, but for national security in sectors where chemical inputs are critical to healthcare, energy, and defense manufacturing.

Protecting American Inventors and Economic Leadership

CRF supported the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s proposal requiring foreign patent applicants to act through registered U.S. patent practitioners. These comments focused squarely on economic security and fairness.

CRF explained that procedural abuse by foreign actors—often operating beyond the reach of U.S. enforcement—distorts patent examination queues and delays legitimate applications. American startups, small businesses, and independent inventors bear the cost when unaccountable filings consume limited agency resources. Requiring licensed U.S. representation restores accountability, protects domestic innovators, and reinforces the rule of law in a system that is foundational to U.S. economic leadership.

Cutting Medicare Red Tape That Drives Up Costs for Seniors

In comments to CMS on Medicare Advantage and Part D policy, CRF urged the agency to treat administrative burden as a real cost driver, not a neutral compliance exercise. Excessive reporting requirements, duplicative quality measures, and prescriptive oversight regimes ultimately raise premiums, limit plan choice, and reduce access—especially for seniors in rural or underserved areas.

CRF emphasized that regulatory complexity disproportionately harms smaller plans and providers, accelerating consolidation and weakening competition. Simplification and deregulation are not about weakening oversight; they are about preserving affordability, access, and sustainability in programs that millions of seniors rely on.

Modernizing Communications Rules to Improve Affordability

CRF also filed comments at the FCC supporting forbearance from outdated, monopoly-era interconnection mandates. These legacy rules, designed for a 1990s telecommunications landscape, now force providers to maintain obsolete infrastructure and divert capital away from modern networks.

CRF explained that regulatory inertia functions as a hidden tax on consumers. Higher network costs ultimately mean higher phone and broadband bills, slower deployment, and reduced resilience. Disciplined deregulation promotes competition, investment, and affordability while preserving essential public safety backstops.

Streamlining LNG Permitting to Strengthen Energy Security

In comments to DOE and FERC, CRF supported streamlining authorization requirements for routine, low-risk activities at liquefied natural gas facilities. CRF stressed that permitting delays raise energy prices, discourage investment, and weaken U.S. energy leadership at a time when global energy markets are increasingly tied to geopolitical stability.

Predictable and efficient permitting is not deregulation—it is good governance. Smarter processes allow agencies to focus scrutiny where it matters most while supporting affordability, reliability, and America’s role as a dependable energy supplier to allies.

Addressing Hidden Housing Costs from EPA Paperwork

Finally, CRF challenged EPA’s unrealistic paperwork estimates for lead-based paint disclosure requirements. Understated compliance burdens fall hardest on small landlords and real estate professionals, pushing them out of the market and accelerating consolidation. Over time, this reduces housing supply and raises costs for renters and buyers.

CRF emphasized that honest burden accounting is essential to understanding how regulation affects housing affordability and market structure, not just formal compliance metrics.

A Consistent Message

Across every filing last week, CRF delivered the same message: ideology has no place in national defense, and unchecked bureaucracy has real costs for American families, workers, and small businesses. Regulatory systems must be disciplined, lawful, and grounded in reality if they are to protect security, preserve affordability, and sustain economic freedom. CRF will continue to press that case—one rulemaking at a time.