By any measure the Trump 2.0 Administration is off to a blazing start. While there is constant news coverage of “DOGE” and Elon Musk’s efforts to expose government inefficiencies and improper spending, less so is the coverage devoted to the deregulatory efforts being taken on by the Administration. On January 31, 2025, Trump signed Executive Order 14192, titled “Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation”. While it will take time to see how this plays out in practical terms and it will no doubt be a bumpy ride, it offers some insights as to where the Administration is heading.

Probably the most notable part of the EO is the 1 for 10 requirement which says that for any new an Agency wants to promulgate, 10 must be repealed. Relatedly, any costs imposed by a new rule must be offset (at least net-zero) by the elimination of existing costs. The EO also expands the definition of “regulation” to encompass just about everything under the sun to include how an agency implements, interprets, or prescribes a law or policy and specifies (without limitation) policy and guidance documents, memos, guidance, etc. regardless of whether they were enacted through the Administrative Procedures Act. The order also specifies that no regulation can be issued unless it is included in the Unified Regulatory Agenda.

As with any EO issued, the devil is always in the details. In this new regime, the Office of Management and Budget becomes even more critical (if that is even possible!) as the gatekeeper of the rules and will provide direction to individual agencies on how to implement the EO and measure its costs. Each individual agency will need to develop its own regulatory plans for review and approval by OMB. This is where the sausage gets made and is a big question mark in terms of how this new directive filters down at the agency level.

Trump 2.0 also has implemented a 60-day freeze on any new rules and is already rescinding recently promulgated regulatory actions by the Biden Administration. The other lever that is being employed to limit regulatory action and government overreach are funding freezes and spending reductions. This is where DOGE’s initial tasks are taking root. Lastly, with a trifecta of Republicans in charge there is a chance that even the Administrative Procedures Act could come under fire and look to be revamped through Congress.

While it is too early to tell how this will play out and ultimately impact transportation and trucking, it stands to reason that there will be fewer regulations coming down the pike, and others will come off the books. The end result is fewer regulations to have to comply with and fewer to enforce. The industry could be empowered to not be as shackled by regulation in advancing its safety programs, and government will hopefully focus its efforts on the issues that have clear and measurable impacts on safety. In STC’s view, the real axis of change needs to happen on the back end of legislation, regulation, and program implementation. Congress enacts many laws, and agencies craft even more regulations and programs to implement them but rarely is either branch of government challenged to determine if these work as designed and intended.

Our loyal readers may recall that STC has opined in the past about the regulatory process needing change. In particular, our Measuring.Improved.Safety.Success article from June of 2024, as well as other related articles that speak to this need. We even made some helpful suggestions on ways DOT could do this as it ponders its reform efforts. We believe this new paradigm of government thinking and renewal provides great opportunities to reassess and reimagine the traditional government playbook with an eye on government being held accountable for those items that matter for safety.