More transparency and readability for regulations sounds great. However, this part stuck out to me:
>Criminal prosecution based on regulatory offenses is most appropriate for those persons who know what is prohibited or required by the regulation and choose not to comply, thereby causing or risking substantial public harm. Criminal prosecutions based on regulatory offenses should focus on matters where a putative defendant had actual or constructive knowledge that conduct was prohibited.
This seems a step backwards. It would seem fairly easy to argue for almost any crime that one simply just didn't know it was a crime.
>Criminal prosecution based on regulatory offenses is most appropriate for those persons who know what is prohibited or required by the regulation and choose not to comply, thereby causing or risking substantial public harm. Criminal prosecutions based on regulatory offenses should focus on matters where a putative defendant had actual or constructive knowledge that conduct was prohibited.
This seems a step backwards. It would seem fairly easy to argue for almost any crime that one simply just didn't know it was a crime.