Your Safety and Rights Are Next as FTC and DOJ Target Vital Regulations Under False Pretenses

The Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice recently sent a letter pressing federal agencies to pinpoint and remove regulations labeled as anticompetitive. This effort, tied to President Trump’s Executive Order on Reducing Anticompetitive Regulatory Barriers, claims to ignite entrepreneurship and innovation. Yet the promise rings empty when you examine its likely winners. The drive to gut rules often hides behind talk of freedom, but it leaves ordinary people—shoppers, employees, small-business owners—exposed to unchecked corporate greed.

On the surface, cutting red tape sounds reasonable. Who doesn’t want simpler systems? The FTC and DOJ argue that regulations lock out new players, shield big corporations, and hinder progress. They highlight public comment opportunities, like the FTC’s Request for Information, as evidence of openness. But scratch beneath, and the story falters. Agencies meant to defend fair markets are now being steered to favor corporate giants over the public’s needs, a troubling trend that’s hard to ignore.

This effort isn’t about pruning outdated policies. It’s a calculated move to erode the safeguards that keep markets honest and safe. Well-designed regulations shield consumers from scams, secure workers’ rights, and uphold environmental standards. Without them, power shifts to those already dominant—large firms with vast resources and influence.

The Trump administration’s deregulatory campaign rests on the idea that fewer rules spark competition and lower prices. History paints a different picture. When oversight weakens, markets don’t suddenly become fairer. Instead, costs rise, services decline, and power concentrates. The public deserves policies grounded in reality, not blind trust in corporate goodwill.

Supporters of this agenda point to high compliance costs—$3.1 trillion in 2022, or 12 percent of GDP, by some estimates—claiming they crush small businesses and stifle innovation. But these figures often inflate the truth, bundling essential protections with bureaucracy. In reality, smart regulations create fairness, letting small firms and startups compete without being steamrolled by industry titans.

Past deregulation efforts reveal stark consequences. The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 lowered some fares but left rural communities with fewer flights, isolating them. The 2008 financial crisis, partly fueled by lax oversight, stripped millions of their homes and livelihoods. These aren’t just theories—they’re real harms that hit families hardest.

Today’s rush to eliminate rules threatens to echo those failures. The FTC and DOJ’s directive for agencies to list anticompetitive regulations appears diligent, but it lacks depth. The Executive Order demands swift recommendations for scrapping or altering rules, with little focus on long-term effects. This haste undermines the Administrative Procedure Act’s call for transparent, evidence-driven decisions.

Public input, though praised as central, feels like an afterthought. The FTC’s Request for Information and the DOJ’s Anticompetitive Regulations Task Force seek comments, but tight deadlines—May 26 for feedback—hinder real participation. Everyday citizens, unlike well-resourced corporate lobbyists, struggle to engage in these complex processes. The outcome? Policies that tilt toward those with the loudest voices.

Defenders of deregulation highlight wins, like spectrum auctions that raised $230 billion and fueled wireless advancements. But these successes are selective, ignoring wider damage. Weakened environmental rules harm public health. Slashed worker protections depress wages. Loosened antitrust measures drive up prices. The data shows that unregulated markets empower the strong, not the public.

Strong regulations don’t block competition—they enable it. Rules that address harms, like pollution or unsafe goods, create equitable markets. They protect workers from exploitation and consumers from fraud. The FTC’s mission to foster competition depends on upholding these standards, not tearing them down.

Rather than racing to cut rules, agencies should prioritize public voices. The Administrative Procedure Act requires notice-and-comment periods, but these must be inclusive. Longer deadlines, simpler processes, and outreach to small businesses and community groups can ensure policies reflect real needs, not just corporate agendas.

Decades of evidence support robust oversight. The 1982 breakup of AT&T, driven by antitrust action, unleashed telecommunications innovation. Strict EPA standards have improved air and water quality. These victories prove that regulation, when thoughtful, drives progress while preserving fairness.

The FTC and DOJ’s letter claims to promote competition, but its approach favors corporate profits over public welfare. By casting regulations as obstacles, it dismisses their role in protecting the vulnerable. We need policies that center people—consumers grappling with rising costs, workers seeking fair pay, communities fighting for clean environments.

Now is the time to recommit to equitable markets. Reject deregulation’s empty promises and embrace rules that empower everyone. Bolster antitrust enforcement to tackle monopolies. Strengthen consumer protections for accountability. Uphold environmental and labor standards for a sustainable future. These actions won’t hinder innovation—they’ll ensure it serves the many, not the few.

The fight for fair markets is about justice. As the FTC and DOJ compile their lists of rules to cut, we must demand transparency, thorough analysis, and a focus on the public good. Anything less undermines a system meant to work for all.