The same thing happened under Reagan/Bush I and Bush II. The relentless drumbeat against regulations is nothing more than a call to improve corporate profits at the cost of workplace and product safety, financial sector instability and overall market competitiveness.
My construction sites were inspected many times by MSHA inspectors. It was annoying because we ran as safe of a site as we could, exceeding the regulations on countless points. But the inspectors were driven to find violations at every site that they inspected, so much so that it was tempting to leave an obvious violation in plain sight like a compressed air line coupling lacking a cotter key safety lockdown.
Every time we discuss the government doing something to raise wages someone invariably says that the government shouldn't be in the business of supporting higher wages, i.e. raising the minimum wage, supporting unions, reducing immigration legal and illegal, increasing tariffs, etc. But the last forty years of movement conservatism's dominance of economic policies has been nothing more than repeated examples of the government supporting higher profits without any complaints from conservatives.
Perhaps we could get an explanation of why this is, that workers have to rely on the vulgarities of the market while the corporations can count on the government to artificially increase their profits, largely by intentionally suppressing wages?
Logic would dictate that we should have a balance between profits and wages in the government policies that we institute and not the profit first policies that we have now. To the point that we have the absolute absurdity of the Republicans selling a tax cut clearly targeted for the 1% by lying that it is a way to increase wages.