Washington bureaucrats, overreaching regulations, and unsubstantiated labels: that’s been Dodd-Frank’s M.O. for the last six years. These truths were reinforced by U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer’s two-page order this week in the case of MetLife Inc. v. Financial Stability Oversight Council. Judge Collyer’s ruling in favor of MetLife delivered a devastating blow to Dodd-Frank’s “too big to fail” designation process.

Established under the Dodd-Frank Act and headed by the Treasury Secretary, currently Jack Lew, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) is a bureaucratic, Washington, insider panel. FSOC is accountable to no one, and provides little transparent guidance for improvement after designation – just condemnation and a label that allows bureaucrats to oversee heavier regulation.

FSOC has the power to designate a nonbank financial company as a “systemically important financial institution” (SIFI) if it determines the company could pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States. However, there is no set of guidelines as to how a company is deemed a SIFI, and there is no roadmap for eliminating that potential threat to the financial stability of our nation. Simply, Americans are led to believe the government will “know it when they see it.” This is of little comfort because the regulators charged with seeing the next crisis, failed to see and stop the last one. By designating these companies as potential risks, FSOC guarantees taxpayers will bailout SIFI-designated companies. Once again, the government is picking winners and losers.

I applaud Judge Collyer’s ruling and MetLife for taking a stand. The MetLife decision shows us two things. First, the government cannot answer basic questions about the risks to the financial system because an insurance business model doesn’t pose a systemic risk.  Second, the decision proves that FSOC’s SIFI designation was not thoroughly vetted and that there is still much work to be done with this process. But the underlying issue remains: companies are still forced to take this fight to court to remove a designation label.

That’s why I have introduced H.R. 4248, the FSOC Designation Review Act. My bill establishes a new, transparent path for both FSOC and already designated SIFI’s to actively address and eliminate the potential risks to the stability of the United States. This idea has been known as an “off-ramp” to de-designation and I believe it will only broaden and ensure the effectiveness of the statutorily mandated annual review process with clearer guidelines for both FSOC and SIFI’s. If companies are designated because they are thought to have systemic risk, then there should be a codified way on how they can de-risk: plain and simple.

MetLife is just the first major company to fight this in court, but I’ll bet they won’t be the last. If Dodd-Frank and FSOC are truly serious about eliminating risk, then they should want to improve the process on which a company can be de-designated, and end this Washington bureaucratic nightmare one and for all.

Rep. Westmoreland represents Georgia’s Third Congressional District and serves on the House Financial Services Committee as Vice Chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.