The shift in regulatory function spills over.
Hyman ’14 [David and William Kovacic; November 3; H. Ross and Helen Workman Chair in Law and Professor of Medicine, B.A., M.D., and J.D. from the University of Chicago; Global Competition Professor of Law and Policy, George Washington University Law School and Non-Executive Director, United Kingdom Competition and Markets Authority; GW Law Faculty Publications and Other Works, “Competition Agencies with Complex Policy Portfolios: Divide or Conquer?” no. 631]
When regulatory tasks are reallocated, or a new agency is inserted into the mix, or new powers are given to an existing agency, there is a significant potential to disrupt this regulatory ecosystem. Disruption can take a variety of forms. The new entrant may siphon off money and personnel, making it difficult for incumbent agencies to perform their existing responsibilities. Reallocation of authority may also upset longstanding understandings that formed the basis for fruitful inter-agency collaboration. The entrant may receive a substantive mandate whose formal commands resemble the language that appears in the statutes of other regulatory authorities. The interpretation of the new entrant’s mandate in one judicial could spill over into the interpretation of the mandates of other agencies in separate cases.