Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Reins in Independent Agencies to Restore a Government that Answers to the American People

February 18, 2025

Fact Sheets

View Original

Action Summary

Restoring Constitutional Accountability: The Executive Order reaffirms that all executive power is vested in the President under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, ensuring every federal agency is accountable to the American people.
Mandatory White House Review: All agencies are now required to submit draft regulations for White House review (with the exception of the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy), and must consult on their priorities and strategic plans to align with Presidential performance standards.
Budgetary Oversight: The Office of Management and Budget will adjust budget apportionments for so-called independent agencies to ensure tax dollars are spent wisely.
Centralized Legal Interpretation: The President and the Attorney General will be responsible for interpreting laws for the executive branch, replacing divergent interpretations from separate agencies.
Limiting Independent Agency Power: Independent agencies such as the FTC, FCC, and SEC will no longer impose rules without Presidential oversight, addressing concerns over unaccountable regulatory actions that cost billions and affect major policy areas.
Reaffirming Government Responsibility: The Order enforces the principle that governmental power must be answerable to the people, aligning agency operations with constitutional requirements and restoring democratic oversight.

Risks & Considerations

The Executive Order mandates that all federal agencies, including independent ones, submit draft regulations for White House review. This could lead to increased bureaucratic oversight and potential delays in the implementation of regulations that may affect research funding and compliance requirements for universities.
By centralizing the interpretation of laws within the executive branch, there is a risk of reduced autonomy for agencies that traditionally support higher education and research, such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). This could impact the regulatory environment in which Vanderbilt University operates.
The increased oversight and control over independent agencies may lead to shifts in policy priorities that could affect funding allocations and strategic initiatives relevant to higher education and research institutions.
Vanderbilt University may need to closely monitor changes in agency regulations and strategic plans to ensure compliance and alignment with new federal priorities, potentially requiring adjustments in administrative processes and strategic planning.

Impacted Programs

Office of Sponsored Programs at Vanderbilt may need to adapt to changes in federal funding processes and priorities, ensuring that grant applications align with the new regulatory environment.
Vanderbilt’s Legal and Compliance Office might face increased demands to interpret and implement new regulations and policies resulting from the centralized oversight of federal agencies.
The Research Affairs Office could be impacted by changes in the regulatory landscape, necessitating adjustments in research compliance and funding strategies.
Programs that rely on federal agency partnerships, such as those with the NSF or NIH, may need to reassess their collaborations and funding opportunities in light of the new executive oversight.

Financial Impact

The reallocation of federal funds and changes in agency priorities could impact the availability of research grants and funding opportunities for Vanderbilt University, potentially affecting its research budget and financial planning.
Increased oversight and potential delays in regulatory processes may lead to uncertainties in funding timelines, requiring Vanderbilt to develop contingency plans for ongoing and future projects.
Vanderbilt may need to invest in additional resources to ensure compliance with new regulations and to effectively navigate the changing federal landscape, impacting operational costs.
Opportunities for securing federal funding may shift, necessitating strategic adjustments in grant application processes and research focus areas to align with new federal priorities.

Relevance Score: 4 (The order presents a need for potential major changes or transformations of programs.)

Key Actions

Vanderbilt’s Office of Federal Relations should closely monitor changes in regulatory processes and ensure that the university’s interests are represented in consultations with federal agencies. This will be crucial in adapting to new oversight and accountability measures imposed by the executive order.
The Department of Political Science should conduct research on the implications of increased presidential oversight on independent agencies. This research can provide valuable insights into how these changes might affect policy-making and regulatory environments, which can be shared with policymakers and the public.
Vanderbilt’s Financial Office should assess the potential impact of changes in federal agency budget allocations on university funding and grants. Understanding these shifts will be essential for adapting financial strategies to maintain and enhance funding opportunities.
The Law School should explore the legal implications of the executive order, particularly regarding the balance of power between the executive branch and independent agencies. This exploration can inform legal scholarship and provide guidance on navigating the evolving regulatory landscape.

Opportunities

The executive order presents an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions to engage in public discourse on the balance of power and accountability in government. By hosting forums and discussions, the center can contribute to the national conversation on constitutional governance.
Vanderbilt can capitalize on the increased focus on accountability by developing partnerships with federal agencies to influence policy-making processes. This could include joint research initiatives and collaborative projects that align with the university’s strategic goals.
The emphasis on oversight and accountability offers an opportunity for Vanderbilt’s Public Policy Studies Program to analyze the effectiveness of these measures in achieving transparent governance. By providing evidence-based recommendations, the program can influence policy reforms and enhance Vanderbilt’s role as a thought leader.

Relevance Score: 3 (The order requires some adjustments to processes and procedures to align with new oversight and accountability measures.)

Average Relevance Score: 3.6

Timeline for Implementation

N/A: No specific implementation deadline or timeline is provided in the fact sheet; only the issuance date (February 18, 2025) is mentioned.

Relevance Score: 1

Impacted Government Organizations

All Federal Agencies: The order mandates that every executive branch agency—not just Cabinet departments—submit draft regulations for White House review, consult on priorities, and have performance standards set by the President, thereby extending its reach across the entire federal government.
Independent Agencies (e.g., FTC, FCC, SEC): These agencies, which have previously operated with relative autonomy, are now required to align with Presidential oversight and review processes, significantly curtailing their independent regulatory authority.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB): The OMB is directed to adjust funding allocations for independent agencies, ensuring tax dollars are spent in line with the new accountability framework.
Department of Justice (Attorney General): Tasked with interpreting the law for the executive branch, the Attorney General will now operate under direct supervision, consolidating legal interpretations within the executive branch.
Federal Reserve (monetary policy functions exempt): While the order targets independent agencies broadly, it explicitly exempts the monetary policy responsibilities of the Federal Reserve from White House review.

Relevance Score: 5 (The directive applies broadly across nearly the entire executive branch, impacting a wide range of key agencies.)

Responsible Officials

President – Holds overall supervision and ultimate authority, ensuring that all federal agencies adhere to the executive order by submitting draft regulations and consulting with the White House.
White House – Reviews draft regulations from agencies, sets performance standards, and monitors strategic planning, thus directly implementing the oversight directives.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) – Adjusts budget apportionments for independent agencies to promote fiscal responsibility as mandated by the order.
Attorney General – Interprets the law for the executive branch under the President’s supervision, unifying legal interpretations across agencies.

Relevance Score: 5 (Directives affect White House and Cabinet-level officials, thereby influencing top executive management and oversight across the entire executive branch.)