By Former Sen. Kevin Lundberg and Charles Heatherly | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
It’s not news that America’s $6 trillion federal Administrative State is targeted for radical downsizing by President Donald J. Trump. What is also not news is that Colorado’s progressives will oppose most of the President’s policies and probably think that Colorado can escape the oncoming Trump deregulation bulldozer.
The far more interesting question is, will the Colorado Republican Party get its act together in time to partner with the Trump Administration’s initiatives as they impact the federal Administrative State’s appendages in Colorado.
It is already clear from the character and fast pace of President-elect Trump’s agency appointments that his rhetoric likely will be followed quickly by concrete actions. He is selecting a team of “Disrupters” firmly dedicated to reducing the scope of the federal government’s fiscal “footprint” and eliminating or radically reducing many regulatory mandates. And yet, in Colorado the impact and success of Trump’s “disruptions” will depend in part on the Colorado Republican Party’s ability to get its act together and proceed in a coordinated manner in support of the President’s policies.
On the afternoon of Jan. 20, soon after taking the oath of office, President 47 will sign numerous Executive Orders, followed soon by dozens of administrative divestiture and deregulation orders signed and published lawfully by his appointees in federal agencies. But, how will this tidal wave of “divestiture” orders affect progressive Colorado, where over the last decade the state has adopted many state barriers to economic development on top of suffocating federal regulations?
It’s important to understand that to President Trump and his team of “Disrupters,” the term “Administrative State” has a broader meaning than “Deep State,” which is widely used to describe permanent civil service employees who have a vested interest in the continuation of existing programs and federal funding. In academic circles, it has a 100-year pedigree with origins in the Woodrow Wilson Administration.
The modern Administrative State has both benefits and costs, but the true total costs in terms of weak legislative oversight and accountability are seldom examined. Importantly, many current federal programs exist not by lawful acts of Congress, but by the “administrative entrepreneurship” allowed for 40 years under the “Chevron Deference” doctrine created by a 1984 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Fortunately, in 2024 that ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court, and assuredly, most of Trump’s federal appointees are well aware of a legal and political truism: any federal program created not by Congress but by an agency’s administrative rule-making can be altered or abolished the same way by a new team of administrators.
That’s the good news. “Elections have consequences!” The bad news is, in Colorado, California and other “progressive” states, the downsizing sought by President Trump and his agency appointees will encounter fierce, organized resistance with opposition amplified by the left-dominated legacy media. Moreover, in “blue states” the full implementation and benefits flowing from Trump’s deregulation actions often will be obstructed by state laws and programs adopted by legislatures dominated by progressives.
How will the Colorado Republicans respond? Will they actively support Trump’s reforms in energy, crime, national security, immigration, health care and public education? To change course, the paralyzing pessimism and defeatism common among Colorado Republicans must be replaced by the same courage and vision being exhibited by President-elect Donald Trump.
As the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, said when confronted by a severe constitutional challenge, “As our case is new, we must think and act anew.” Amen! The clock is ticking.
Fromer Sen. Kevin Lundberg served in both chambers of the Colorado legislature from 2003-18. Charles Heatherly served in the Reagan Administration to both the U. S. Department of Education and the Small Business Administration, and later served as policy director for the state Senate’s Republican Caucus from 2010-18.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.