Obamacare’s $1.8 Trillion regulatory drag on jobs and the economy


Nancy Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It may not all be a result of Obamacare, but until all regulations are completed, no one, not even Nancy Pelosi, will really know what the effect will be. The only possible way to reverse this steady drain of regulatory abuse of the economy is to vote Republican in this Fall’s election. Too bad it is too late to even get some of those RINOs out.

Excerpt: Crews has made a working project of his “Tip of the Costberg” report which he regularly updates. In it, he compares the cost of regulations estimated by federal agencies to a much broader list of estimates from multiple federal and independent sources. And even then, he said, it doesn’t include hard-to-calculate costs associated with antitrust intervention, regulation of electricity networks, or the cost of constrained access to natural resources.

“While OMB officially reports amounts of only up to $88.6 billion in 2010 dollars,” said Crews, “the non-tax cost of government intervention in the economy, without performing a sweeping survey, appears to total up to $1.806 trillion annually.”

But, he added, “according to back of the envelope surveys and roundups, with gaps big enough to fit the beltway through, that up to $1.806 trillion annually and in many categories perhaps even considerably more, is a defensible assessment of the annual impact on the economy.”

His estimate is close to the $1.7 trillion estimate from the Small Business Administration which the White House distanced itself from. For comparison, the total U.S. GDP is $15 trillion.

The wave of Obama regulations has become a huge sore point in the business world with groups as large as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce down to the International Franchise Association crying for fewer rules. The administration, however, argues that the rules and regulations pushed out under the president have made products and workplaces safer.

Read full article here.


Sneaky President Obama issues major “green energy” executive order


President Barack Obama speaks at the Departmen...

President Barack Obama speaks at the Department of Energy. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Another example of Obama going around Congress, usurping their Constitutional authority and acting like a dictator. Unless we get rid of the Democrat stalemate, and Congress gets some backbone, we will be a free Republic no longer.

Excerpt: Between conservatives focusing all their attention on the successes/failures of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., and the left having a meltdown over the supposed “racism” and unprecedented disrespect of Clint Eastwood’s “Empty Chair” routine, little attention has been given to an executive order issued last Thursday by President Barack Obama that targets industrial “efficiency” and carbon emissions.

“Today, we are taking another step to strengthen American manufacturing by boosting energy efficiency for businesses across the nation,” said President Obama.

The order, which aims to increase the number of cogeneration plants in the U.S. by 50 percent by 2020 and slash carbon emissions by 150 million tons per year, is the administration’s latest effort to “deploy cleaner and more efficient energy production in the country by working around political resistance to climate change and ‘green’ energy legislation on Capitol Hill,” Reuters reports.

“The Federal Government has limited but important authorities to overcome … barriers, and our efforts to support investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP [Combined heat and power] should involve coordinated engagement with a broad set of stakeholders,” the order says.

Translation: If duly elected representatives of the people get in the way of “climate change” (formerly known as “global warming,“ formerly known as ”global cooling”) legislation, work around them.

“The man is legislating by presidential fiat!” conservative author and radio show host Mark Levin said Friday. “This is unconstitutional.”

Read full article here.

Economic Lessons from American History by John Steele Gordon


Experiences from bank runs during the Great De...

Experiences from bank runs during the Great Depression led to the introduction of deposit insurance in the US. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

John Gordon gives great insight into the historical implications of what our government is doing to destroy our standing in the world.

Excerpt:  Today we live in a world far beyond the imagination of those who were alive in 1607. The poorest family in America today enjoys a standard of living that would have been considered opulent 400 years ago. And for most of this time it was the United States that was leading the world into the future, politically and economically.

This astonishing economic transformation provides rich lessons in examples of what to do and not do. Let me suggest five.

1. Governments Are Terrible Investors

2. Politicians Have Self-Interest Too

3. Immigration is a Good Thing

4. Good Ideas Spread, Bad Ones Don’t ( I selected this snippet as a sample of the history surrounding one of my favorite causes, tort reform.) 

Thomas Jefferson the first person in history to advocate a system of decimal coinage, and the United States the first country to adopt one. This was a very good idea, and, as good ideas always do, it quickly spread. Today every country on earth has a decimal currency system.

But if Jefferson’s decimal coinage concept was a good idea that quickly spread around the world, another idea that developed here at that time was lousy: the so-called American Rule, whereby each side in a civil legal case pays its own court costs regardless of outcome. This was different from the English system where the loser has to pay the court costs of both sides.

The American Rule came about as what might be called a deadbeat’s relief act. The Treaty of Paris (which ended the American Revolution) stipulated that British creditors could sue in American courts in order to collect debts owed them by people who were now American citizens. To make it less likely that they would do so, state legislatures passed the American Rule. With the British merchant stuck paying his own court costs, he had little incentive to go to court unless the debt was considerable.

The American Rule was a relatively minor anomaly in our legal system until the mid-20th century. But since then, as lawyers’ ethics changed and they became much more active in seeking cases, the American Rule has proved an engine of litigation. For every malpractice case filed in 1960, for instance, 300 are filed today. In practice, the American Rule has become an open invitation, frequently accepted, to legal extortion: “Pay us $25,000 to go away or spend $250,000 to defend yourself successfully in court. Your choice.”

Trial lawyers defend the American Rule fiercely. They also make more political contributions, mostly to Democrats, than any other set of donors except labor unions. One of their main arguments for the status quo is that the vast number of lawsuits from which they profit so handsomely force doctors, manufacturers, and others to be more careful than they otherwise might be. Private lawsuits, these lawyers maintain, police the public marketplace by going after bad guys so the government doesn’t have to—a curious assertion, given that policing the marketplace has long been considered a quintessential function of government.

The reason for this is that when policing has been in private hands, self-interest and the public interest inevitably conflicted. The private armies of the Middle Ages all too often turned into bands of brigands or rebels.

5. Markets Hate Uncertainty

Usually, when there has been a steep decline in economic activity, recovery is equally steep. The valley is V-shaped. That is what happened in 1920, when there had been a severe post-war depression and then a strong recovery. So why was the recovery so slow in the 1930s? One reason, according to an increasing number of economic historians, is that Franklin Roosevelt had a bad habit of changing his mind. While highly intelligent, he was no student of economics and seldom read books as an adult. So much of his program was, essentially, seat-of-his-pants policy. First there was the National Recovery Administration, which amounted to a vast cartelization of the American economy. When the Supreme Court threw it out—by a unanimous vote—FDR moved on to other remedies, including big tax increases on the rich.

But markets, which can function even in disaster with ruthless efficiency, hate uncertainty. When uncertainty regarding the future is high, they tend to tread water. As a result, there was what is known as a “strike of capital.” While corporations often had large cash balances—General Motors made a profit in every year of the Great Depression—and banks had money to lend, there was little investment and few loans made. Both the banks and the corporations were too uncertain about what the government was going to do next.

That is precisely what is happening today. Banks and corporations have plenty of money. Apple alone is sitting on about $100 billion worth of corporate cash. And yet the recovery from the crash of 2008 has been tepid at best. The valley is U-shaped. Undoubtedly a big reason for that is the enormous uncertainty that has plagued the country since 2008. Will health care—one-sixth of the American economy—be taken over by the folks who run the post office? Will the Bush tax cuts be ended or continued? Will the corporate income tax go up or down? Will manufacturing get a special tax deal? Will so-called millionaires—who, when you listen carefully to what liberal politicians are saying, can earn as little as $200,000 a year—be forced suddenly to pay “their fair share”?

Who knows? So firms and banks are postponing investment decisions until the future is clearer. Perhaps the clearing will happen on November 6.

Read full article here.

Unintended consequences – CFL bulbs cause skin damage


A compact fluorescent lamp for general or home use

A compact fluorescent lamp for general or home use (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Another example of our government not knowing what they are doing other than exerting control over the citizenry. They have forced the manufacture of light bulbs offshore to China, doing away with thousands of jobs here in the U.S., and, in doing so, have created a health hazard. Another example of why we should trust them with our health system. lol 

Excerpt: Based on the research, scientists concluded that CFL light bulbs can be harmful to healthy skin cells. 

“Our study revealed that the response of healthy skin cells to UV emitted from CFL bulbs is consistent with damage from ultraviolet radiation,” said lead researcher Miriam Rafailovich, Professor of Materials Science and Engineering at Stony Brook University, in New York, in a statement. “Skin cell damage was further enhanced when low dosages of TiO2 nanoparticles were introduced to the skin cells prior to exposure.” 

According to Rafailovich, with or without TiO2 (a chemical found in sunblock), incandescent bulbs of the same light intensity had zero effects on healthy skin. 

The scientists found that cracks in the CFL bulbs phosphor coatings yielded significant levels of UVC and UVA in all of the bulbs — purchased in different locations across two counties — they examined. 

With high levels of ultraviolet radiation present, the researchers delved into how the exposure affected the skin. According to the findings, skin damage from exposure to CFLs was consistent with harm caused by ultraviolet radiation. 

Read the full Daily Caller article here.

The Liberal war on freedom


Students rest underneath a portrait of U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., inside the court building June 27, 2012 in Washington, DC. The high court could hand down a landmark ruling on the Affordable Care Act as early as Thur Photo credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Posted this article on Examiner.com.

Excerpt: What brought me to this trip down memory lane, was the impending Supreme Court decision due out tomorrow on Obamacare and two other articles in the news today. Of course Obamacare is the granddaddy of all power grabs by the Federal government, but these other two are just another symptom of how the Liberal left is wearing us down and destroying our freedoms.

The first article relates to DOJ regulations just coming out regarding the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. It seems now, 22 years after the law was enacted, the DOJ believes that the slope must be limited on miniature golf holes and the walkways must be wide enough to accommodate the handicapped. In addition, because the Islam religion considers dogs to be unclean, businesses will be required to admit the blind with their mini horses as guide animals. The bull in the china shop comes to mind and maybe the horse at the table next to me in my favorite restaurant.

The next item is just a recommendation by a government advisory board that is proposing that all obese adults be given intensive counseling to help them get rid of some of their excess fat. At 5’ 9” and 200 lbs, I qualify with a BMI of over 30. No problem, Medicare will pay for the counseling, and I am sure that I will learn a lot more from a government therapist than I have from Dr. Oz, the South Beach and Atkins diet books and even the valuable info garnered from Michelle, our First Lady.

Power versus freedom, that is what elections are all about.

Read my full article here.

Rural kids, parents angry about Labor Dept. rule banning farm chores


Official portrait of Secretary of Labor Hilda ...

Official portrait of Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Control, control, control. How do we get this increasingly intrusive government out of our lives? Obama and his minions are doing everything that they can to destroy the work ethic in this country. Increasing food stamps and letting them be used to purchase anything, moving millions of unemployed onto disability, promoting the Occupy protests against Capitalism: all these tell me that Obama is out for change, but not the change that we believe in, but the change he and his radical socialist left believes in. Issa states that the Obama administration is the most corrupt he has ever seen and it is well funded by the slush funds created by the stimulus and Obamacare. 

We have a fight on our hands and it is time for the tea party to reactivate and show the far left that we are taking back our Constitutional Republic and that “we are not going to take it anymore”. 

Government training as a substitute for 4H, regulating family farming; sounds a little Hitleresque to me.

Excerpt: A proposal from the Obama administration to prevent children from doing farm chores has drawn plenty of criticism from rural-district members of Congress. But now it’s attracting barbs from farm kids themselves. 

The Department of Labor is poised to put the finishing touches on a rule that would apply child-labor laws to children working on family farms, prohibiting them from performing a list of jobs on their own families’ land.

Under the rules, children under 18 could no longer work “in the storing, marketing and transporting of farm product raw materials.” 

“Prohibited places of employment,” a Department press release read, “would include country grain elevators, grain bins, silos, feed lots, stockyards, livestock exchanges and livestock auctions.”

The new regulations, first proposed August 31 by Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, would also revoke the government’s approval of safety training and certification taught by independent groups like 4-H and FFA, replacing them instead with a 90-hour federal government training course. 

“What would be more of a blow,” he said, “is not teaching our kids the values of working on a farm.” 

“Losing that work-ethic — it’s so hard to pick this up later in life,” Clark said. “There’s other ways to learn how to farm, but it’s so hard. You can learn so much more working on the farm when you’re 12, 13, 14 years old.” 

It’s something Kansas Republican Senator Jerry Moran believes simply shouldn’t happen. 

During a March 14 hearing, Moran blasted Hilda Solis for getting between rural parents and their children. 

“The consequences of the things that you put in your regulations lack common sense,” Moran said.

 “And in my view, if the federal government can regulate the kind of relationship between parents and their children on their own family’s farm, there is almost nothing off-limits in which we see the federal government intruding in a way of life.” 

The Department of Labor did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Read full Daily Caller article here.