PLATFORM | I'M A TRUMPSTER

1/3

Being a 'Trumpster' means you see no race, color or creed. We are all people of the human race and more important we are all Americans. Do not let the left, Democrats,or liberals manipulate you into believing President Trump is a racist. Quite the contrary! President Trump is more like a savior, a savior for the United States of America & its people.

We have never heard one man mention the love for his country and his fellow countrymen more often than President Trump. He never speaks in favor of supporting hatred or bigotry. I am truly ashamed to admit I use to be a Democrat. I was taught this phrase.”If you’re born black you’re a Democrat” so for no other reason I hated Republicans. This was a devastating mistake in my life. But as I observed different things, read books, educated myself and, researched facts AND NOT PROPAGANDA it was quite clear that Democrats are the party of liars, deception, and hatred. Democrats want to rule minorities by keeping them dependent on their handouts, this way the Democrats will always be able to control you. Republicans represent freedom. Republicans want to teach you how to fish not just give you the fish. That represents TRUE freedom. Most minorities who are Democrats don’t even realize it was the Republicans who freed the slaves, not the Democrats. The Democrats have always been the party of hate, collusion, and manipulation. This is Nevermore obvious than what’s taking place today. It truly is treason...

LIST OF ISSUES

EDUCATION

Workforce development, job training, & vocational schools

We want every American to know the dignity of a hard day's work. We can lift our citizens from welfare to work, from dependence to independence, and from poverty to prosperity.

As tax cuts create new jobs, let us invest in workforce development and job training. Let us open great vocational schools so our future workers can learn a craft and realize their full potential. And let us support working families by supporting paid family leave.

Source: 2018 State of the Union address , Jan 30, 2018

I may cut Department of Education

Q: Should the federal government establish Common Core as a nationwide academic standard for high school graduation?

Trump: "I'm not cutting services, but I'm cutting spending. But I may cut Department of Education," Trump says. "I believe Common Core is a very bad thing. I believe that we should be--you know, educating our children from Iowa, from New Hampshire, from South Carolina, from California, from New York. I think that it should be local education."

Clinton initially responded to the question about how to fix the U.S. educational system by praising Common Core. She then said that families today are too "negative" about the current system, a system Clinton described as "the most important non-family enterprise" in the country. After noting what she described as "unfortunate" opposition to Common Core, Hillary Clinton also dismissed the concerns of Common Core opponents by saying they just "do not understand the value" of the controversial top-down curriculum. Source

Source: 2016 AFA Action iVoterGuide on 2016 presidential hopefuls , Nov 8, 2016

No federal government profit from student loans

A four-year degree today can be expensive enough to create six-figure debt. We can't forgive these loans, but we should take steps to help students.

The big problem is the federal government. There is no reason the federal government should profit from student loans. This only makes an already difficult problem worse. The Federal Student Loan Program turned a $41.3 billion profit in 2013.

These student loans are probably one of the only things that the government shouldn't make money from, and yet it does. And do you think this has anything to do with why schools continue to raise their tuition every year? Those loans should be viewed as an investment in America's future.

Source: Crippled America, by Donald Trump, p. 58-9 , Nov 3, 2015

Dept. of Education runs top-down one-size-fits-all system

A lot of people believe the Department of Education should just be eliminated. Get rid of it. If we don't eliminate it completely, we certainly need to cut its power and reach. Education has to be run locally. Common Core, No Child Left Behind, and Race to the Top are all programs that take decisions away from parents and local school boards. These programs allow the progressives in the Department of Education to indoctrinate, not educate, our kids. What they are doing does not fit the American model of governance.

I am totally against these programs and the Department of Education. It's a disaster. We cannot continue to fail our children--the very future of this nation.

Source: Crippled America, by Donald Trump, p. 50-1 , Nov 3, 2015

Cut Department of Education and Common Core

Q: Would you cut departments?

TRUMP: We're going to be cutting tremendous amounts of money and waste and fraud and abuse. But, no, I'm not cutting services, but I am cutting spending.ÿBut I may cut Department of Education-- Common Core is a very bad thing. I think that it should be local education. If you look at a Jeb Bush and some of these others, they want children to be educated by Washington, D.C. bureaucrats.

Source: Fox News Sunday 2015 Coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Oct 18, 2015

We spend more per student than any other nation

Education spending: "People are tired of spending more money on education than any nation in the world per capita."
Local control of education: "Education has to be local."
American education in an international context: "We're 26th in the world. 25 countries are better than us at education. And some of them are like third world countries. But we're becoming a third world country."

Source: Fordham Institute EduWatch 2016 by Brandon White , Jun 18, 2015

Common Core is a disaster

[As president I'd] end Common Core. Common Core is a disaster. Bush is totally in favor of Common Core. I don't see how he can possibly get the nomination. He's weak on immigration. He's in favor of Common Core. How the hell can you vote for this guy? You just can't do it. We have to end--education has to be local.

Source: 2015 announcement speeches of 2016 presidential hopefuls , Jun 16, 2015

Cut the Department of Education way, way down

Here are some of Trump's views on education:
Department of Education: "You could cut that way, way, way down." -- South Carolina Tea Party Convention, Myrtle Beach, January 2015
Common Core curriculum standards: "I am totally against Common Core." -- South Carolina Tea Party Convention, Myrtle Beach, January 2015. "That's a disaster. That's bad. It should be local and all of that." -- Iowa Freedom Summit, Des Moines, Iowa, January 2015
Infrastructure: "Fixing a country's infrastructure--our bridges, our schools, our airports--that, I can tell you, no one is close to Trump." -- Iowa Freedom Summit, Des Moines, Iowa, January 2015
Local control: "Education has to be local." -- Announcement speech, New York City, June 16, 2015

Source: Forbes Magazine "2016 Candidates Want You to Know" series , Jun 16, 2015

Opposes Common Core

Donald Trump doesn't think the GOP is demanding enough. "Republicans have to toughen up," Trump said in a speech at CPAC. "Toughen up on the IRS, toughen up on Benghazi, toughen up on everything."

Trump bashed Jeb Bush on education, who Trump said was "in favor of common core."

"I thought Romney could do it," Trump, who backed the candidate during the last election, said. "I don't want what happened to Mitt Romney to happen again."

Source: CBS News on 2015 Conservative Political Action Conf. , Feb 27, 2015

Common Core means Washington tells you what to study

Q: What's Donald Trump think about Common Core?

Trump: Well first of all, I think it's going to kill Bush, and I think that education should be local, absolutely. I think that for people in Washington to be setting curriculum and to be setting all sorts of standards for people living in Iowa and other places is ridiculous.

Q: Why is it going to kill Bush?

Trump: Because I think people don't want to have somebody from Washington looking down and saying this is what you're going to be studying.

Q: But do you think he's responsible for that part of it?

Trump: No, but he's responsible for supporting it."

Source: Hugh Hewitt radio interview on 2016 presidential hopefuls , Feb 25, 2015

Americans don't know their roots: study your ancestry

I was listening to some Europeans once and they seemed to agree that Americans didn't seem to know their roots. Of course, their roots go back for many more centuries than ours and may be easier to decipher because many of us have ancestors from different countries. But it gave me a reason to think about what they said, and I realized in many cases they were right. I recently went to Scotland, as my mother's side of the family is of Scottish ancestry, and I've spent time studying that country & therefore my heritage. It could even explain why I love golf so much--it originated in Scotland.

I found that I enjoyed learning about Scotland and it has broadened my horizons as well as my interests as a businessman. I am building a golf course in Aberdeen that will be spectacular, and I very much enjoyed my visiting and meeting the people from the culture and country. I also realized I still have a lot to learn, which will no doubt lead me into more interesting ventures as well as adventures.

Source: Think Like a Champion, by Donald Trump, p. 37 , Apr 27, 2010

Comprehensive education instead of limiting subjects

Comprehensive education dissolves the lines between knowing too much and knowing too little on a variety of subjects--subjects that are necessary for success. Recently, I interviewed a young man who was very well versed in his field of expertise and almost uneducated in every other subject. It was like he had tunnel vision, and although I admired his knowledge of his field, I had to realize that, considering the scope of my enterprises, he might not be a great fit because of his limited interests.

Source: Think Like a Champion, by Donald Trump, p. 47 , Apr 27, 2010

Teach citizenship; stop “dumbing down”

Our schools aren’t safe. On top of that, our kids aren’t learning. Too many are dropping out of school and into the street life-and too many of those who do graduate are getting diplomas that have been devalued into “certificates of attendance” by a dumbed-down curriculum that asks little of teachers and less of students. Schools are crime-ridden and they don’t teach.

How long do we think the U.S. can survive schools that pretend to teach while our kids pretend to learn? How can a kid hope to build an American Dream when he hasn’t been taught how to spell the word “dream”?

Public education was never meant to only teach the three R’s, history, and science. It was also meant to teach citizenship. At the lower levels it should cover the basics, help students develop study habits, and prepare those who desire higher education for the tough road ahead. It’s a mandate the public schools have delivered on since their inception. Until now.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p. 67 , Jul 2, 2000

End “creative spelling,” “estimating,” & “empowerment”

The people running our public schools don’t want to damage a student’s self-esteem. They’re concerned about “empowerment.” They’re worried kids will feel bad if they get a problem wrong or flunk a spelling test. It’s better to pat a kid on the head and praise his “creative spelling” than point out that there is a traditional name for people with poor spelling skills. We call them illiterates.

Some educators think being “judgmental” is the worst of all sins. The problem is that life tends to judge-and harshly at that. There’s no room for error when you’re launching the space shuttle. Or mixing the concrete for the foundation of Trump Tower, for that matter. Try giving a number “in the neighborhood of” on your tax returns and you may end up in a place where there’s a very definite number stamped on the back of your shirt.

I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It’s easy. Just click “Edit Text” or double click me to add your own content and make changes to the font. Feel free to drag and drop me anywhere you like on your page. I’m a great place for you to tell a story and let your users know a little more about you.

HOUSING

1. Protecting HUD from the Ax: In recent years, HUD has been repeatedly subject to spending caps. Low-income housing advocates want those caps lifted and HUD’s budget increased to keep apace with rising fair market rents, but the Trump administration has called for an even greater cut to non-defense spending—a cumulative cut of one percent each year, or what would amount to a 30 percent cut to HUD’s budget by 2026, accounting for inflation. Advocates say such cuts would be detrimental to New York’s public-housing capital backlog, the availability of Section 8 vouchers and the provision of project Section 8 contracts. While Carson recognized at his confirmation hearing that rental assistance can be “life saving,” he also said he supports Trump’s annual one percent cut to non-defense spending, and wants to do more research before proposing a HUD budget. “I don’t know what the number is going to be, quite frankly. It might more, it might be less,” he said.

2. Defending Obama’s Progress on Fair Housing: To improve the implementation of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which requires that governments work toward reducing barriers to housing and equal opportunity, the Obama administration developed a new rule, along with a set of implementation tools, that would help local governments assess the impacts of their policy decisions on combating housing segregation and discrimination. Republican lawmakers have argued Obama’s efforts are tantamount to social engineering and have introduced bills to outlaw the new program. Carson once called Obama’s fair housing program a “failed socialist experiment,” but at his confirmation hearing emphasized that he was only against “cookie-cutter” government programs, though how this statement applies to Obama’s program is unclear.

3. Growing the National Housing Trust Fund: Created in 2008, this fund finally got its first round of funding after years of delay last year and provides states with block grants to build, preserve, and rehabilitate rental housing, with 75 percent dedicated to extremely low-income families making less than 30 percent of the Area Median Income. It derives its funding from an assessment on Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s earnings. Low-income housing advocates would like to see the assessment rate increased or a permanent budget allocation to the fund, but Republicans have called investments in the fund a “lump of coal in the stocking of every American taxpayer.”

4. Opposing Work Requirements and Time Limits: In a policy brief released last June, House Republicans said HUD’s rental assistance programs “lack requirements to encourage greater individual self-sufficiency,” and called for work-requirements for work-capable households receiving rental assistance, as well as time-limits to benefits. Carson remained vague at his hearing about these policies, saying he saw the necessity of housing assistance to helping families move out of poverty, but also wanted to place “a little more time and effort developing the potential of our people.” Low-income housing advocates argue that such policy ideas are rooted in poor-shaming, disregard the fact that many people on rental assistance do work or are family caretakers, and argue that attaching such requirements to welfare in the 1990s did not eliminate, and in some cases worsened poverty.

5. Ending Subsidies for Rich Homeowners: Of the $200 billion* the federal government spends each year on housing aid, eight out of ten dollars goes to families earning more than $100,000 and four out of ten to families making more than $200,000. The biggest culprit for this regressive redistribution is the mortgage deduction tax program, which provides large tax breaks to wealthy homeowners. Housing advocates in the United for Homes Campaign seek revisions of the program that they say would shift the benefits of the tax credit to low-income homeowners while creating $241 billion in savings over the next ten years. There are signs that Republican lawmakers may be open to considering these reforms, but whether they will be willing to reinvest the savings in low-income housing programs is another question.

6. Reforming and Bolstering the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program: This program, currently the federal government’s primary funding source for new affordable housing projects, allows local governments to sell tax credits to investors, generating funding for construction. Some low-income housing advocates like NLIHC and the affordable housing industry want to see an expansion of, and reforms to, the LIHTC program. Republicans have been friendly to LIHTC, and have worked with Democrats to introduce legislation that would expand the program. But Trump has also endorsed a House proposal to reduce the corporate tax rate from 30 percent to 15 percent, which could make investors less interested in buying tax credits and undermine the effectiveness of LIHTC.

7. Protecting Homeownership Opportunities: Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are government-backed, for-profit private enterprises that buy mortgages and sell them to investors, which helps ensure a stable and ongoing supply of mortgage money for homeowners. During the mortgage crisis of 2008, the two giant enterprises nearly collapsed and were taken over by the federal government. Republicans, including several of Trump’s cabinet picks, argue that the government’s role in these enterprises places taxpayers at risk, and say that they should again be privatized to give other lenders the opportunity to compete with them. But a Wall Street Journal analysis suggests privatization would benefit Freddie and Fannie’s shareholders more than it would taxpayers, and some low-income housing advocates want to ensure privatization does not have negative impacts on homeowners and on the revenues of the housing trust fund. Carson has once again given mixed message on this front, saying he wants to lessen “government footprint” but also protect homeownership opportunities.

8. Saving At-Risk Homeowners from Private Equity: Following the 2008 mortgage crisis, HUD’s Federal Housing Administration, Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae began selling bundles of at-risk mortgages to hedge funds and private equity companies in an effort to bolster their hard-hit finances. But Right to the City and other advocates say that private buyers drive homeowners into foreclosure, then flip the properties to make a profit. (Private equity representatives dispute these claims, and HUD has made changes to the program in response to concerns.) Right to the City contends that these agencies should instead retain these homes as public assets or transfer them to community land trusts.

9. Bolstering Obama’s Local Hire Work: The Obama administration is in the process of revising the Section 3 rule, which requires local governments that take advantage of HUD funding to ensure 30 percent of workers are residents of HUD housing programs. It will be up to Carson to see through revisions to the rule, which would expand the requirements to more projects.

10. Ending Housing Discrimination Against Those with Convictions: HUD rules restrict people with criminal convictions from living in or even visiting public housing. Yet movements have been underway in many cities, including New York, to remove some of these restrictions. The Obama administration also released a draft rule last spring that forbids private property owners from throwing out a rental housing application simply on the basis of an applicant’s prior conviction. While criminal justice advocates hope to continue eliminating restrictive polices, Republican Speaker Paul Ryan has in the past opposed reform efforts.

HEALTHCARE

But the White House proposed budget goes even further than Graham-Cassidy in cutting the Medicaid program, ratcheting down caps to the program more severely. While the CBO projected Graham-Cassidy would cut Medicaid by $1 trillion over 10 years, the White House budget would result in total Medicaid cuts of an astounding $1.4 trillion over 10 years. These cuts would compound every year—meaning they would be deeper in year 10 than in year 1, and even more profound after that.

Additionally, the president proposes further weakens the ACA’s popular consumer protections under the guise of providing further flexibility to states. President Trump's vision for health care would return us to the days when people with preexisting conditions could be denied essential benefits or charged so much that coverage would be out of reach.

But Trumpsters believe Obamacare is hurting American families, farmers, and small businesses with skyrocketing health insurance costs. Moreover, soaring deductibles and copays have made already unaffordable plans unusable. Close to half of U.S. counties are projected to have only one health insurer on their exchanges in 2018. Replacing Obamacare will force insurance companies to compete for their customers with lower costs and higher-quality service. In the meantime, the President is using his executive authority to reduce barriers to more affordable options for Americans and U.S. businesses.

ENVIRONMENT

The environmental policy of the Donald Trump administration represents a shift from the policy priorities and goals of his predecessor, Barack Obama. While Obama's environmental agenda prioritized the reduction of carbon emissions through the use of clean renewable energy,[1] the Trump administration has sought to increase fossil fuel use and scrap many environmental regulations which he has referred to as impediments to business.[2] On July 5 2018, amid numerous ethics investigations, Trump's first pick for the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Scott Pruit, resigned and he was replaced by Andrew Wheeler.

Trump has pulled the United States out of the Paris climate accord.[3] Immediately upon his inauguration, the White House released an "America First Energy Plan", which focused on increasing combustion of fossil fuels without mentioning renewable energy. The plan would repeal many Obama policies including the Climate Action Plan, and limit the EPA's mission of protecting air and water quality. In April 2018, Pruitt announced plans to undo the Obama administration's auto fuel efficiency and emissions standards.

Within days of taking office he signed executive orders to approve two controversial oil pipelines and to require federal review of the Clean Water Rule and the Clean Power Plan.[4] Trump is calling for more drilling in national parks and has announced plans to open up more federal land for energy development.[5] Trump's Department of the Interior has announced plans to allow drilling in nearly all U.S. waters, the largest expansion of offshore oil and gas leasing ever proposed.[6] The administration has been charged with re-writing EPA pollution- control policies of chemicals that are known to be serious health risks to make them more friendly to the chemical industry.[7] A 2018 analysis reported that the Trump administration's rollbacks and proposed reversals of environmental rules would likely "cost the lives of over 80,000 US[8] residents per decade and lead to respiratory problems for many more than 1 million people."

[9] Responding to a 2018 government-funded study which warned of potentially catastrophic climate change impacts, Trump said he had read part of the report but did not believe it. [10] Neither Trump nor his two choices for EPA Administrator believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming.[11] His appointments to key agencies dealing in energy and environmental policy reflect his commitment to deregulation, particularly of the fossil fuel industry. Several of his cabinet picks are people with a history of opposition to the agency they were named to head.[12] Three of the four chair-level members of Trump's transition team commissioned to draw up a list of proposals to guide his Native American policies have links to the oil industry."[13] He also invited American manufacturers to suggest which regulations should be eliminated; industry leaders submitted 168 comments, of which nearly half targeted EPA rules.[4]

DIVERSITY

President Donald Trump's administration is set to scrap guidelines designed to promote diversity in university admissions, US media reported.

The policies were introduced by Mr Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, and outlined legal recommendations for institutions looking to consider race in applications as a way to boost diversity on campuses.

Mr Trump's government is now encouraging university officials to adopt "race-blind" admissions standards instead, echoing the policies in place during the Bush administration.

The US Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that universities may use affirmative action to help minority applicants get into college.

However Conservatives have said such programs can hurt white people and Asian-Americans.

Trump administration officials have argued that the Obama-era guidelines "mislead schools to believe that legal forms of affirmative action are simpler to achieve than the law allows," according to the Wall Street Journal, who first reported the move.

It comes as the Justice Department is investigating whether Harvard University is illegally discriminating against Asian-American students by holding them to a higher standard in its admissions process.

The complaint by more than 60 Asian-American organisations claims that Harvard's policies are discriminatory because they limit the acceptance of Asian-Americans.

Harvard has said its admissions policies comply with US laws and that it has worked to increase financial aid to ensure economic, as well as racial, diversity in its classes.

The policy shift to "race-blind" admissions processes will add further fuel to a national debate on the role of affirmative action in university admissions, an issue the Supreme Court has been called on to consider several times in the past four decades.

In 2016, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the practice in a 4-3 decision, but Justice Anthony Kennedy left the door open to legal challenges in his ruling by stating that universities must continue to review their affirmative-action policies to assess their impact.

Mr Kennedy is due to retire at the end of the month leaving his successor, who will be nominated by President Trump in the coming days, as a potential swing vote on the practice.

The Trump administration has argued that the guidelines put forward by the Obama administration go beyond the Supreme Court's ruling on the issue.

“The executive branch cannot circumvent Congress or the courts by creating guidance that goes beyond the law and - in some instances - stays on the books for decades,” said Devin O’Malley, a spokesman for the Justice Department, told the New York Times.

The new policy echoes that used during President George W Bush’s administration, which advised educational institutions to use “race-neutral methods” for admitting students.

The Bush-era guidance was returned to the Education Department's civil rights website last Friday ahead of the new stance on affirmative action.

The White House has not yet responded to requests for comment.

BUSINESS

President Donald J. Trump’s Policies are Delivering Record-Breaking Economic Results for African Americans

We’re fighting to give every American — all over the country, every single American — a future of dignity and purpose and of pride.

President Donald J. Trump

RECORD-BREAKING RESULTS: Under President Donald J. Trump, economic opportunity is soaring and unemployment is dropping for African Americans.

This year, African-American unemployment fell to a record low of 5.9 percent.
Total African-American employment has increased by 976,000 since President Trump’s election and stands at a record high.
The poverty rate for African Americans reached its lowest level on record in 2017.

INVESTING IN DISTRESSED COMMUNITIES:

President Donald J. Trump’s Opportunity Zone Incentives are promoting investment in left-behind, economically distressed communities.

President Trump’s historic tax cut legislation included new Opportunity Zone Incentives to promote investment in economically distressed communities across the country.
Opportunity Zones offer tax incentives for businesses to invest in economically distressed communities, making them a powerful vehicle for economic growth and job creation.
- Nearly 35 million Americans live in communities designated as Opportunity Zones.
- 8,761 communities in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and five United States territories have been designated as Opportunity Zones.
Through these tax incentives, we will jumpstart our American communities, create momentum for economic recovery, and attract investment to diverse areas across our Nation.

PROMOTING MINORITY-OWNED BUSINESS: Through job training, tax reform, and deregulation, President Donald J. Trump and his Administration are creating a better environment for minority-owned business.

President Trump is empowering minority business owners by eliminating a historic amount of unnecessary and burdensome regulations that too often hinder their growth.
Through the Department of Commerce’s Minority Business Development Agency, President Trump is delivering numerous new opportunities for minority business enterprises.
President Trump’s tax cuts included provisions that benefit minority-owned small businesses, a segment that contributes more than $1 trillion in annual economic output.
The President signed a memorandum dedicating at least $200 million a year to promote STEM education and especially benefitting women and minorities.

DELIVERING FOR HBCUs: President Donald J. Trump has made supporting our Nation’s Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) a key priority for his Administration.

In February 2017, President Trump signed an Executive Order on the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities.
- The Executive Order moved the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities to the White House from the Department of Education.
- This was the earliest Executive Order on HBCUs signed by any President.
Earlier this year, President Trump signed legislation that increased Federal funding to HBCU programs by more than 14 percent.
The President signed legislation that forgave more than $300 million in Hurricane Katrina related debt that threatened New Orleans, Louisiana, area HBCUs

Neomi Rao is administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget.
Since President Trump took office, farmers can more productively use their land. Small businesses can hire more workers and provide more affordable health care. Innovators are freer to pursue advances in autonomous vehicles, drones and commercial space exploration. Veterans enjoy expanded access to doctors through a telehealthprogram. And infrastructure can be improved more quickly with streamlined permitting requirements.

The administration’s regulatory reform efforts continue to accelerate, as new data released by the administration Wednesday on regulatory reform in 2018 show. As this fall’s unified regulatory agendademonstrates, we’re projecting even more reform in 2019.

Over the past two years, federal agencies have reduced regulatory costs by $23 billion and eliminated hundreds of burdensome regulations, creating opportunities for economic growth and development. This represents a fundamental change in the direction of the administrative state, which, with few exceptions, has remained unchecked for decades. The Obama administration imposed more than $245 billion in regulatory costs on American businesses and families during its first two years.

The benefits of deregulation are felt far and wide, from lower consumer prices to more jobs and, in the long run, improvements to quality of life from access to innovative products and services. Eliminating unnecessary and duplicative red tape has helped the Trump administration achieve the lowest unemployment rates in nearly 50 years and dramatic economic growth for our country.

The administration’s reform agenda focuses on unleashing the freedom of American workers, innovators and businesses. We are pushing back the expansion of the administrative state, which has too often imposed immense regulatory costs without any benefit. At the same time, we work with agencies to meet the regulatory responsibilities Congress has required. Agencies now focus on developing common-sense regulatory policies that work for the American people by protecting health and safety while minimizing costly, unnecessary burdens.
As Learned Hand, one of America’s great judges, said: “The spirit of liberty is the spirit which is not too sure that it is right.” Our government of limited powers is committed to individual liberty and protected by checks and balances that recognize it can be difficult to get things right. The Constitution leaves most decisions to states, local governments, religious and civic organizations, and individual Americans. The lawmaking process requires agreement among the House, Senate and president, representing a broad swath of the American people. Regulation essentially functions as lawmaking without the checks provided by a representative Congress, and it can be challenging to know whether a regulation benefits the broader public or a particular interest group or ideology. Humility about government intervention protects the spirit of liberty that animates our productive and innovative society.