Senate hearing frames deregulation executive order as an antitrust test
Loading...
Summary
Senators and witnesses debated President Trump's April executive order to cut regulatory barriers, with witnesses from the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice saying antitrust enforcement and targeted regulatory reviews, not blanket deregulation, should guide policy changes.
Sen. Mike Lee, chair of the subcommittee, opened a hearing on federal rules he said can “insulate businesses from competition” and urged removal of regulatory barriers he described as “monopoly motes rather than consumer protections.”
The hearing, featuring testimony from Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Mark Meador and senior Justice Department officials, focused on how the agencies will respond to a presidential executive order directing review and potential elimination of regulations judged to inhibit competition.
Why it matters: The session put two frames in tension — proponents of rolling back specific rules to reduce compliance costs and expand market entry, and witnesses who argued that vigorous antitrust enforcement and targeted regulatory reform are the means to preserve competition without sacrificing consumer protections.
FTC Commissioner Mark Meador said the agency launched a public inquiry after the executive order and has received numerous comments from across the economy. “All too often, federal regulations passed in the name of the American people don't actually serve the interests of the American people,” Meador testified, adding that the FTC will recommend changes to agencies and Congress where regulations are harming competition.
Roger Alford, principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's Antitrust Division, said the division opposes both private restraints and public regulations that threaten competition. He described a dual approach: strong, targeted antitrust enforcement against monopolistic behavior and cooperation with agencies to unwind genuinely anti-competitive rules. “Public regulation can be a powerful exclusionary tool,” Alford said, urging transparency and vigilance against agency capture by incumbent firms.
Panelists from academia and industry underscored a common finding in public comments: rules in sectors from health care to transportation and education often have the effect — intentional or not — of advantaging incumbents over new entrants. Witnesses reported that the DOJ and FTC together have collected hundreds of submissions pointing to regulatory barriers; Alford said the division has received more than 400 public responses to its requests for input.
Senators across the aisle pressed for concrete next steps. Some members emphasized that deregulation should not be a pretext for removing safeguards that protect public health and safety. Others highlighted structural tools — including greater resources and merger-fee funding for enforcement agencies — to ensure antitrust authorities can pursue mergers and conduct that harm competition.
The agencies said they will continue reviewing the comments and prioritize reforms where evidence shows rules create entry barriers. The hearing record closed with an acknowledgement that both enforcement and careful regulatory revision will be required to address concentrated markets while maintaining consumer protections.
The subcommittee left open follow-up questions for the record and asked agencies and witnesses to supply additional materials and recommendations.
