I guess it depends on whose ox is being gored

"I hope we will always have non-vindictive Presidents in this country... If there were Presidents who wished to pursue vendettas, the regulatory state would be the most direct and simplest way for him (or her) to do so."

The implication is that the author (a tenured Professor) believes that President Obama and his cabinet is a bastion of moderate, benevolent visionaries.

Things appear different from my perspective.

If there were a President who wished to pursue vendettas, the regulatory state would be the most direct and simplest way for him or her to do so. - See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.ZXTNjbW3.dpuf

I hope we always will have non-vindictive Presidents in this country.  One reason is because the regulatory branch reports to the Executive.  And if you own a large company, it is virtually impossible to be in accordance with all of the regulations all of the time.  If there were a President who wished to pursue vendettas, the regulatory state would be the most direct and simplest way for him or her to do so.  The usual presumption of “innocent until proven guilty” does not hold in many regulatory matters, nor are there always the usual protections of due process. - See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.ZXTNjbW3.dpuf

I hope we always will have non-vindictive Presidents in this country.  One reason is because the regulatory branch reports to the Executive.  And if you own a large company, it is virtually impossible to be in accordance with all of the regulations all of the time.  If there were a President who wished to pursue vendettas, the regulatory state would be the most direct and simplest way for him or her to do so.  The usual presumption of “innocent until proven guilty” does not hold in many regulatory matters, nor are there always the usual protections of due process. - See more at: http://marginalrevolution.com/#sthash.ZXTNjbW3.dpuf