> Their power to do this or to forbid that is highly discretionary and essentially boundless. This isn't true; the regulators are restricted by the law and by

> Their power to do this or to forbid that is highly discretionary and essentially boundless. This isn't true; the regulators are restricted by the law and by politics. In the end, the power exists - political power is preserved - the only question is who controls it. For issues important to society, U.S. tradition is that power is allocated democratically. Americans take a vote; power is ultimately in the hands of the voters. Every other potential authority is theoretically just as powerful and arbitrary, and usually in practice is more powerful and arbitrary (IMHO). I agree about the risks; democracy is the worst possible system - until you look at the alternatives. What better alternative is there?