What about the fact that opponents of proposed regulations are much more likely to comment on it?
I am pro-repeal, yet did not comment. This is obviously because I feel represented by the action, and that my comment will do little or nothing to change the course of it. The purpose of notice and comment is not consensus building. . .
The purpose of the notice and comment phase of regulatory rulemaking is to identify parts of the legislation which could harm members of the public, and to assure that parts causing such harm, if included in the final regulation, were not promulgated arbitrarily or capriciously.
Therefore, it’s incredibly reasonable for proponents of the regulations to remain silent during this phase of rulemaking, while opponents must voice every possible concern.
In essence, the premise of your article misleads the reader as to how regulation (specifically the notice and comment phase) works, and as to how much supportive comments even matter during this process. . .