I used to hold this. I can't put a finger on what exactly changed. I strongly believe Congress is productive enough, and the ambiguity around this sort of thing is good, because it allows flexibility in the face of changing circumstances.

With such a vibrant public democracy as America, things that drag out, like allowing non-competes for fast food workers, are best served with public participation, a long process, and sunlight.

It's not as tightly coupled to a presidential administration as you may think, that's where "Deep State" grumbling comes in: if it's imposed by presidential fiat, its in violation of a 1000 mundane things that courts have historically consistently enforced: a long, public, process with a thorough cost/benefit analysis that indicates a net benefit. So, the "Deep State" (administrative processes that are required to occur for a rule change at an administrative agency, to whom authority was delegated to by the legislature) prevents a unilateral presidency.

Parsing through the FTC press release on non-competes provides some indica of the sunlight/processes involved. [1]

[1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/...