Apr 18, 2016 · Question 4 of 10 10.0/ 10.0 Points Which party is least likely to support government-mandated environmental regulations? A.Green Party B.Democratic Party Correct C.Libertarian Party D.Socialist Party Answer Key: C
Nov 28, 2016 · Question 5 of 10 10.0/ 10.0 Points Which party is least likely to support government-mandated environmental regulations? A.Green Party B.Democratic Party C.Libertarian Party D.Socialist Party Answer Key: C
Apr 27, 2016 · Question 4 of 10 10.0/ 10.0 Points Which party is least likely to support government-mandated environmental regulations? A.Green Party B.Democratic Party C.Libertarian Party D.Socialist Party Answer Key: C
Jul 25, 2017 · C. democracy D. liberalism Answer Key: D Question 4 of 10 10.0/ 10.0 Points Which party is least likely to support government-mandated environmental regulations? A. Green Party B. Democratic Party C. Libertarian Party D. Socialist Party
Poorly designed regulations may cause more harm than good; stifle innovation, growth, and job creation; waste limited resources; undermine sustainable development; inadvertently harm the people they are supposed to protect; and erode the public’s confidence in our government. 3.
Sensible, evidence-based regulations that respect the fundamental role of free-market competition can provide vital public benefits – such as protecting the environment, public health and safety, civil rights, consumers, and investors.
The regulatory dilemma is this: On the one hand, regulation can be critically important to our welfare. Federal and state regulatory agencies have contributed to great improvements in air and water quality, highway safety, public health, honest commerce, racial and gender equality, and many other central aspects of American life. On the other hand, regulatory actions often have come at a cost that exceeds their benefits and sometimes actually have been counterproductive. These failures are abetted by the structure of the regulatory process: regulation operates outside our usual system of checks and balances, where policies are enacted directly by our elected representatives and disciplined by taxing and budgeting. Regulatory agencies have too often fallen short of public expectations and disappointed public trust.
In thinking about the real effects of regulation, it is important to understand that the special resource of the government—which private entities do not possess—is the power to coerce. Interest groups that can convince the government to use its coercive power to their benefit can profit at the expense of others. As a result, regulation tends to get “captured” by well-organized interest groups acting to maximize their own well-being, often at the expense of broader society.
The real costs of regulation are passed on to all Americans, who are generally unaware of these costs because they are hidden in lower wages, higher prices for consumer goods and services, and fewer products and opportunities made available. Often, those least able to represent themselves shoulder the greatest burdens.
Conclusion. The appropriate goal of regulation is to enhance, not undermine, societal well-being. In other words, regulation should do more good than harm. Without a counterfactual, it is impossible to know what a more disciplined regulatory environment would have meant for economic growth and well-being.
The American free enterprise system has been one of the greatest engines for prosperity and liberty in history, and has the potential to deliver a promising future for the United States and the world. 1 Through protecting property rights and fostering healthy competition, democratic capitalism rewards work and ingenuity which improves our lives and has liberated more people from poverty than any other system. 2