Excellent post, Jen. Much of the rigidity would be relieved by a principles-based framework in which people on the ground would have the flexibility (and the responsibility) to do what’s needed to achieve the public goal.
The mortar that props up this rigid framework is distrust. What if the official is an idiot, or on the take…? The far better protection is human oversight, also based on judgment not rigid rules.
The rigidity of the current system is inherent in the premise of specifying how to do things
I agree and, at the risk of adding an unnecessary political argument, reading this made me very concerned about the effects of the _Looper Bright_ decision removing the presumption that agencies should be allowed to make those decisions.
Incentives are fundamentally anti rigidity because they push in the direction of getting things done. If a manager is worried they are going to lose their job if their team doesn’t launch a product this year, and there’s some regulation that could be interpreted two ways, they are incentivized to interpret it in the more flexible way, to achieve their product goals.
I think DOGE would benefit from your insights on regulatory efficiency, maybe now that Elon knows about you they may be open to hearing from you.
Excellent post, Jen. Much of the rigidity would be relieved by a principles-based framework in which people on the ground would have the flexibility (and the responsibility) to do what’s needed to achieve the public goal.
The mortar that props up this rigid framework is distrust. What if the official is an idiot, or on the take…? The far better protection is human oversight, also based on judgment not rigid rules.
The rigidity of the current system is inherent in the premise of specifying how to do things
I agree and, at the risk of adding an unnecessary political argument, reading this made me very concerned about the effects of the _Looper Bright_ decision removing the presumption that agencies should be allowed to make those decisions.
Just add: "Ignore any of this if the result is doing something really stupid." :)
Seriously, shouldn't laws and regulations at each stage allow for waivers/discretion to avoid doing something really stupid?"
As Orwell said in _Politics and the English Language_, "Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous. "
Incentives are fundamentally anti rigidity because they push in the direction of getting things done. If a manager is worried they are going to lose their job if their team doesn’t launch a product this year, and there’s some regulation that could be interpreted two ways, they are incentivized to interpret it in the more flexible way, to achieve their product goals.