Key Takeaways
- Massachusetts has already reviewed and altered a large share of its executive‑branch regulations, but the process is slow and piecemeal.
- New York, Virginia, and Ohio are piloting AI‑driven scans of statutes to uncover outdated or redundant rules such as telegram‑requirements or triplicate filings.
- AI tools can locate “the needle in a haystack” by understanding the sentiment of a query, not just matching exact words, making regulatory cleanup faster and more thorough.
- A Stanford RegLab study found Massachusetts generates over 800 recurring reports, many of which are obsolete (e.g., annual Ireland‑Massachusetts trade reports, coal‑mining inspections, nuclear‑reactor checks).
- Removing unnecessary regulations can save businesses and the state time and money—Virginia’s three‑year cleanup cut regulations by 25 %, saved over $1 billion, lowered home‑building costs by $24 000, and sped permitting.
- Experts urge Massachusetts to adopt similar AI‑assisted regulatory review to eliminate low‑hanging‑fruit bottlenecks and focus government effort on meaningful work.
Modernization Efforts in Massachusetts
Massachusetts has taken steps to refresh its legal code. Under former Governor Charlie Baker, more than 1,700 executive‑branch regulations were reviewed, and roughly two‑thirds were either removed or altered. The “Negating Archaic Statutes Targeting Young Women Act” repealed outdated provisions on abortion, adultery, and contraception. Most recently, Governor Maura Healey signed legislation that replaces offensive language in state laws concerning individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. These actions demonstrate a willingness to modernize, but they remain limited in scope and often stretch over years.
The Slow Pace of Traditional Review
While commendable, the conventional approach is labor‑intensive. Each regulation must be read, interpreted, and judged individually, a process that can take months or even years for a single agency. As a result, many antiquated rules linger on the books, creating unnecessary paperwork for businesses, wasted effort for state employees, and confusion for residents. The editorial board notes that “these efforts should be applauded, they are limited in their reach and take a long time.”
Enter AI‑Powered Regulatory Scanning
A new avenue is emerging: using artificial intelligence to comb through massive volumes of statutes and regulations. Last month, New York Governor Kathy Hochul issued an executive order directing state agencies to employ AI tools to hunt for clearly outdated requirements—such as mandates to send telegrams or file forms in triplicate. Virginia and Ohio have launched comparable initiatives. The AI does not merely search for exact phrases; it interprets the intent behind a query and surfaces provisions that match the general sentiment, even when the wording varies.
How AI Finds the “Needle in a Haystack”
Beth Simone Noveck, a Northeastern University professor and former chief AI strategist for New Jersey, explained to the editorial board that AI can “parse through thousands of pages of text, looking for the needle in a haystack.” Officials receive a curated list of rules that are likely obsolete or inefficient and can then decide whether to repeal, amend, or retain each regulation. This capability transforms a manual, page‑by‑page slog into a rapid, data‑driven review.
Tangible Benefits of Cutting Redundant Rules
Beyond uncovering humorous relics, cleaning up the regulatory code can yield real economic and administrative gains. A Stanford RegLab report highlighted that Massachusetts government produces more than 800 regularly required reports, many of which serve little purpose today. Examples include an annual report on trade between Ireland and Massachusetts (no comparable reports exist for other countries), coal‑mining inspections despite the state’s last coal mine closing over a century ago, and nuclear‑reactor inspection reports though Massachusetts hosts no commercial reactors. While some reports may still be valuable, many are outdated, duplicative, or unnecessary.
Cost Savings from Regulatory Streamlining
Eliminating superfluous reporting frees staff to focus on substantive work. Derek Ouyang, research director at the Stanford RegLab, told the board that “these obsolete, outdated burdens and regulations are sort of like low‑hanging fruit, and in some ways, they’re a bit of a bottleneck.” Removing them reduces compliance costs for businesses, cuts the time state employees spend enforcing meaningless rules, and shortens delays for residents seeking permits or services.
Virginia’s Successful Cleanup as a Model
Virginia offers a concrete precedent. Before AI was widely available, the state undertook a three‑year regulatory cleanup project that removed more than 25 % of its rules. The effort saved Virginians over $1 billion, lowered the average cost of building a new home by $24 000, and accelerated many agencies’ permitting processes. The results illustrate how systematic repeal of outdated regulations can produce measurable economic benefits.
The Tendency to Only Add Laws
Despite the clear advantages, governments often focus on creating new statutes while neglecting to prune old ones. Noveck observed to the editorial board, “We add, and we add, and we add — we never take anything away.” This habit leads to a bloated code that hinders efficiency. Shifting some resources toward identifying and eliminating unnecessary rules could reverse that trend.
A Call for Massachusetts to Follow Suit
Given the successes elsewhere and the promise of AI‑assisted review, Massachusetts should adopt a similar approach. By deploying AI tools to scan its statutes and regulations, the state can quickly pinpoint archaic provisions—such as those requiring telegrams or triplicate filings—and evaluate them for repeal or reform. The ensuing cleanup would not only discard quirky relics but also streamline government operations, reduce unnecessary costs, and allow public servants to devote more attention to policies that genuinely serve the Commonwealth.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2026/08/06/opinion/ai-outdated-laws/