That's not a bad proposal, because it isn't a proposal. What would it mean to cut regulations by 20% ? I suppose there might be some attempt at a definition, but I am sure they can't come up with a definition that makes sense.
Do they want to reduce the total pages of regulations by 20% ? That could be achieved by eliminating exceptions to regulations. How about reducing the number of separate regulations ? That could be achieved by reformatting the regulations without changing anything.
Would eliminating all regulation of sex, drugs, and abortion count ? Is this a joint GOP-NORML-NAMBLA coalition ?
In any case, such a law would have to grant enormous discretion to the executive branch.
The magic asterisk has magically moved from magic asterisk budgeting in which it is declared that some spending will be cut to magic asterisk deregulation in which it it declared that some regulations will be eliminated.
I already knew that the House Freedom Caucus are a post policy caucus, but they seem determined to remove all doubt. They can't be bothered to come up with extreme vague proposals. They demand a yoooge conservative shift but aren't willing to bother with details such as the difference between the EPA and the SEC.
I'm tempted to say this will finally save Congress by convincing these representatives' constituents that they are dangerous irresponsible crazy fools if election after election hadn't proven that there is no way to convince these representatives' constituents to vote for a Democrat.