**Reevaluating the Zero-Based Budgeting Framework and Environmental Legislation**
While the zero-based budgeting framework holds promise, it is essential to recognize that the foundational legislation it builds upon may be flawed. To create a more efficient and rational system, we must reconsider the underlying laws that govern environmental protection.
Specifically, we should abolish the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, and other legislation aimed at protecting natural habitats. These laws often impose burdensome regulations that hinder economic development and innovation without commensurate environmental benefits.
Instead, all environmental laws should be streamlined to focus solely on air and water pollution regulations and the implementation of a modest carbon tax, ranging from $15 to $35 per tonne. This approach would address the most pressing environmental concerns while minimizing the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals.
To ensure lasting change, these reforms need to be enacted through laws passed by Congress, not merely through executive orders. Executive orders can be easily repealed by subsequent administrations, whereas laws passed by Congress tend to be more enduring. Passing more legislation through Congress will actually disempower the administrative state, rather than concentrating more power in the executive branch. The stickiness of laws matters because inconsistent legislation is often more problematic than overtly bad laws, as it creates uncertainty and instability.
By simplifying environmental legislation and concentrating on the most impactful areas, we can foster a more balanced approach to environmental stewardship that supports economic growth and human prosperity.
**Reevaluating the Zero-Based Budgeting Framework and Environmental Legislation**
While the zero-based budgeting framework holds promise, it is essential to recognize that the foundational legislation it builds upon may be flawed. To create a more efficient and rational system, we must reconsider the underlying laws that govern environmental protection.
Specifically, we should abolish the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, and other legislation aimed at protecting natural habitats. These laws often impose burdensome regulations that hinder economic development and innovation without commensurate environmental benefits.
Instead, all environmental laws should be streamlined to focus solely on air and water pollution regulations and the implementation of a modest carbon tax, ranging from $15 to $35 per tonne. This approach would address the most pressing environmental concerns while minimizing the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals.
To ensure lasting change, these reforms need to be enacted through laws passed by Congress, not merely through executive orders. Executive orders can be easily repealed by subsequent administrations, whereas laws passed by Congress tend to be more enduring. Passing more legislation through Congress will actually disempower the administrative state, rather than concentrating more power in the executive branch. The stickiness of laws matters because inconsistent legislation is often more problematic than overtly bad laws, as it creates uncertainty and instability.
By simplifying environmental legislation and concentrating on the most impactful areas, we can foster a more balanced approach to environmental stewardship that supports economic growth and human prosperity.