How to Rein in Stifling Regulations That Hurt Companies and Kill Jobs

January 19, 2017

WRITER

How do we restrict the power of political appointees to federal agencies, stopping them from creating industry-stifling and job-killing regulations?

"The first thing you do is you give the power back to Congress," Glenn said Wednesday on radio.

Passing the REINS Act (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act) would do just that, increasing accountability for and transparency in the federal regulatory process by requiring Congress to approve all new major regulations.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) has been a vocal supporter of the REINS Act.

"He says this will fix 90 percent of what is wrong with regulation," Glenn said.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: So one of the things I found really interesting in that was it wasn't, as the author writes, and he was living through it in the 1930s -- this was a book that was written in the 1930s and then found later by his family and published in the 2000s. He said, "What made it so dangerous is that everyone dismissed everything that was going on by Hitler and prior to Hitler because first, it was an emergency. And we had to do these things because it was an emergency during the Weimar Republic." And then it became -- it became settled. Everything kind of settled down. And Hitler came in.

And when Hitler came in, they said -- he said the argument for what Hitler was doing, by everybody, the normalcy bias -- everybody was looking for it to be normal. And everybody was saying, "No, he's doing it exactly constitutional. He's doing it exactly the right way. He's demanding that it be done the right way."

And so everything -- every law was passed. It was very important, Adolf Hitler, that it was done exactly right at the beginning.

STU: Right. Partially because he had already had so many legal problems. And, you know, he tried to overturn the government earlier and went to prison.

GLENN: Correct.

STU: So he was constantly trying to justify that his organization was lawful --

GLENN: Is legitimate. Was legitimate and lawful. And then, of course, in the end, everything was suspended, and it became him. And so he had his way.

So make no mistake, fascism and totalitarianism can happen through lawlessness or by controlling the government and passing all of the exact laws and dotting all the I's. That cannot be done with our Constitution because of the Bill of Rights.

You cannot pass laws that spy on people, that round people up, that border people into your homes, that hold you without trial. None of that. The one thing that Hitler did not have was the Constitution of the United States. No country on earth has the Constitution.

If we dismiss it now in easy times, when hard times come, it will for sure be dismissed. And then all of your protections go away. And it is the law that is doing it to you.

And believe me, we're going to be telling a story of a lawsuit that has happened to me recently that my First Amendment attorneys could not believe.

And it was -- it had everything to do with the United States government. The things the government claims they can do and now do, will astonish you. To the point to where I said to my attorney, "Wait a minute. There's no way for my -- there's no way for me to defend myself because the government is holding all the cards and we have no access to any of those cards, even though they admit they have the cards." Yes.

Well, why can't I get those cards to defend myself?

Well, the Constitution requires them. If it is in your defense, you have to be able to have them.

So why aren't they giving them?

Because they claim they don't have to do it anymore.

JEFFY: Oh, okay.

GLENN: I'm telling you, when it is you that is sitting across from the government and the government holds all of the cards and you no longer have power, you no longer work for you and the government no longer works for you, you now answer to the government. When they have that kind of total control, you're in trouble. And we're already there. They just haven't exercised it, in any meaningful way.

But we're already there. You cannot lose anymore rights. The Constitution -- we all love the Constitution, period. No "but." Period.

Mark, you're on the Glenn Beck Program. Hello, Mark. Yes, go ahead.

CALLER: Hello, I'm here. Can you hear me now?

GLENN: Yes, go ahead.

CALLER: Okay. Hey. Hi to you and the guys there.

Hey, you know, when you have bureaucrats in office, especially when they're liberal, it's almost impossible to get rid of them. I was reading an article a month ago. There was a 122 positions that were usually political appointees that the -- civil service department heads deemed 87 of them now as permanent jobs that Obama has filled. So how do we go about getting those changed back so that way the role of the president can be done? Constitutionally, can he do it?

GLENN: You do -- yeah. A couple things, yes, because all of the departments are under the president of the United States.

CALLER: Yeah. But how do you get rid of those bureaucrats, who are entrenched, who pass these, quote, unquote, mandates and laws like the EPA and stuff?

GLENN: You do this -- the first thing you do is you give the power back to Congress. And you support, what is it, the REINS Act, which actually gives the power back to Congress. Nothing can be passed by these departments. They cannot act on their own. Congress writes all laws, which is a redrawing of the lines of the Constitution and just making the Constitution in bolder print and taking away the power of -- of the -- so you won't have to worry about anything future.

Then the best way to --

CALLER: Does Paul Ryan and McConnell have the backbone for it?

GLENN: I don't know.

STU: I think they might pass that. I think they might actually -- I think it might actually get through. Obviously, Trump would need to sign it. But I think he would.

GLENN: It is the number one agenda item for people in the freedom movement, and it's --

STU: Mike Lee in particular has led the charge on this, among others.

GLENN: Yeah. He says this will fix 90 percent of what is wrong with regulation.

STU: Yeah, any big regulation that costs -- I don't know. Was it $100 million or more? I think that's the number. Has to go back and go through Congress.

The Woodrow Wilson strategy to get out of Mother’s Day

Stock Montage / Contributor, Xinhua News Agency / Contributor | Getty Images

I’ve got a potentially helpful revelation that’s gonna blow the lid off your plans for this Sunday. It’s Mother’s Day.

Yeah, that sacred day where you’re guilt-tripped into buying flowers, braving crowded brunch buffets, and pretending you didn’t forget to mail the card. But what if I told you… you don’t have to do it? That’s right, there’s a loophole, a get-out-of-Mother’s-Day-free card, and it’s stamped with the name of none other than… Woodrow Wilson (I hate that guy).

Back in 1914, ol’ Woody Wilson signed a proclamation that officially made Mother’s Day a national holiday. Second Sunday in May, every year. He said it was a day to “publicly express our love and reverence for the mothers of our country.” Sounds sweet, right? Until you peel back the curtain.

See, Wilson wasn’t some sentimental guy sitting around knitting doilies for his mom. No, no, no. This was a calculated move.

The idea for Mother’s Day had been floating around for decades, pushed by influential voices like Julia Ward Howe. By 1911, states were jumping on the bandwagon, but it took Wilson to make it federal. Why? Because he was a master of optics. This guy loved big, symbolic gestures to distract from the real stuff he was up to, like, oh, I don’t know, reshaping the entire federal government!

So here’s the deal: if you’re looking for an excuse to skip Mother’s Day, just lean into this. Say, “Sorry, Mom, I’m not celebrating a holiday cooked up by Woodrow Wilson!” I mean, think about it – this is the guy who gave us the Federal Reserve, the income tax, and don’t even get me started on his assault on basic liberties during World War I. You wanna trust THAT guy with your Sunday plans? I don’t think so! You tell your mom, “Look, I love you, but I’m not observing a Progressive holiday. I’m keeping my brunch money in protest.”

Now, I know what you might be thinking.

“Glenn, my mom’s gonna kill me if I try this.” Fair point. Moms can be scary. But hear me out: you can spin this. Tell her you’re honoring her EVERY DAY instead of some government-mandated holiday. You don’t need Wilson’s permission to love your mom! You can bake her a cake in June, call her in July, or, here’s a wild idea, visit her WITHOUT a Woodrow Wilson federal proclamation guilting you into it.

Shocking Christian massacres unveiled

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Glenn's Show Prep