Perhaps you prefer a world in which corporations can dump (even more) waste in the ocean?
That is immediately obvious to just about anybody with a decent head on their shoulders. But now actually proving that takes what almost certainly amounted to thousands (if not tens of thousands) of manhours followed by months of review, and adversarial engagement. It was the outright weaponization of government.
This, btw, is what leads to extremist viewpoints on regulation. Regulations, done in good faith, are a very good thing. But they can easily be weaponized both by the government against enemies of the state, and by other companies, in the case of regulatory capture, to prevent competition. And there is no entirely clear way to prevent these sort of abuses.
As for SpaceX, you're asking me to prove a negative which is impossible. But feel free to find a single-counter example to what I'm saying, as that would completely disprove it. The FAA suddenly decided to impose a 2 month delay to Starship on its 5th launch which was in no way fundamentally different than the priors besides a new splashdown location, and add a bunch of new 'concerns.' In another case the EPA came after SpaceX for "unpermitted discharges" of... oxygen.
And all of these new issues coincided exactly with the timing of the previous political administration defacto naming him an enemy of the state. There was nothing of a comparable scale in the past. Heck they even had a return-to-flight after a major mishap and mishap investigation that took less time than it took for the previous administration's FAA to determine if a shark might get hit by a rocket landing in the ocean...