So if the FDA wants to make a change to, say, the requirements for nutritional labels on food, it would require the House and Senate to pass a bill and the President to sign it?
If the FCC wants to, say, lower the minimum required channel separation in a particular band, that too would need a passed bill and a Presidential signature?
The scope of that power has to be dialed back significantly.
Currently the FDA has the unchecked power to create federal felonies, because failure to comply with FDA regulations is a felony.
I’m sure most people agree that having a FDA is good, as is having an enforcement mechanism. But giving an unelected member of the executive branch the ability to effectively legislate alone is kind of a crazy power to leave totally unchecked.
This power is exactly what creates the CrimeADay twitter feed, since these federal regulations are both insanely minute and often not very well thought out. My favorite example is that it’s a felony to sell shredded cream cheese.
The powers of the FDA aren't totally unchecked. There's an old law called the Administrative Procedures Act. If I understand it right, it basically says (among other things) that government agencies that make rules have to have good reasons for those rules, and that they should be consistent with the purpose of the agency as described in the laws Congress passes delegating authority to that agency. So, if the FDA creates a rule that whistling the national anthem while riding a unicycle on the deck of an aircraft carrier in active service is against the law, citizens adversely affected by that rule can sue the agency and (if successful) have the rule overturned by the courts because the FDA was not granted authority over those things.
I expect it might be possible to challenge the rule against grated cream cheese even if it's within the scope of the FDAs authority if the rule doesn't serve any legitimate purpose.
It’s unchecked by any elected body, more precisely.
You can use the courts as a redress against bad regulations, but you have significantly less input into what generates those regulations, especially since the FDA is not a deliberative body.
Currently the FDA has the unchecked power to create federal felonies, because failure to comply with FDA regulations is a felony.
This is false.
The FDA can only issue regulations within the specific statutory authority given to it by Congress.
Moreover, a violation of an FDA regulation is not a felony. At best, the FDA can refer a case to the Justice Department for an investigation of whether federal laws were violated when violating the regulation. In many cases, it is possible to violate a regulation without violating the law authorizing that regulation. In others, violating the regulation is synonymous with violating the statute because the regulation just restates the statute.
You’re confusing the ability to create a felony vs. the ability to prosecute one. The fact that they still have to refer to the justice department to prosecute is a different thing.
I’m not saying that the FDA has unlimited regulatory authority, they could not for example regulate financial securities, but they have an unchecked authority. This is subtly different.
If the FCC wants to, say, lower the minimum required channel separation in a particular band, that too would need a passed bill and a Presidential signature?
I doubt that that is practical.