While the economy is slowly recovering, the road back to pre-recession employment levels has been peppered with potholes. Partisan politics in Congress are doing nothing to help the economy, or the small businesses working to rebuild it. In one of the latest attempts to harness the influence of small business -- a coveted pawn in political chess games -- former Senator Blanche Lincoln decried government regulation as the biggest impediment to small business and economic recovery in a Huffington Post blog entry. She pointed to Environmental Protection Agency regulations specifically.
But let's get the facts straight.
Small business owners actually support an array of recently proposed EPA regulations. And by wide margins, too. Small Business Majority's most recent polling, released on June 7, found the vast majority of small businesses in Ohio -- a major manufacturing state -- support EPA clean air standards, and two-thirds of those polled also feel government investments in clean energy can stimulate the economy and create jobs now.
Specifically, 7 in 10 small business owners support the EPA's federal standard requiring new power plants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions like carbon dioxide -- even though 6 in 10 of them believe it will directly impact their business.
Todd Stegman is one of the many small business owners who believe clean energy standards are long overdue. Todd co-owns two small businesses in Cincinnati, Ohio, with his father and brother: Osborne Coinage, America's oldest private mint, and Doran Manufacturing, LLC, which provides innovative transportation products for truck fleets. "Boosting energy-efficiency standards in the United States wouldn't thwart growth for small businesses like mine -- it would enhance it," he said. "Encouraging manufacturing businesses to refine their processes by becoming cleaner and more energy-efficient would put us on the way to becoming part of a more competitive global economy."
From Todd's point of view, complying with EPA regulations is simply one of many aspects of owning a business. Consumer demand and the cost of materials are the real concerns, he says. Todd knows firsthand that the long-term benefits of investing in clean and renewable energy far outweigh the upfront costs, as he's already saving money thanks to his 2009 decision to install solar panels.
It's evident EPA regulations are not what's bogging down small business success. Even entrepreneurs who believe new regulations would directly impact their business often still support them. Half of those in our survey believe rules to reduce mercury and other toxic emissions from power plants would impact their company, yet a vast three-quarters still support them. What's more, nearly half strongly support them.
And when it comes to the "Good Neighbor Rule," which would reduce smog and soot crossing state lines, the story is the same: 65 percent are supportive of the rule, withstanding the fact that 52 percent believe it would impact their business directly.
Considering these strong numbers, it would appear there's some disconnect between this data and the Gallup polling Lincoln cited. But in fact, there isn't. The poll, which found 46 percent of small employers aren't hiring because of government regulations, actually found five other reasons that far out-ranked regulations, including no need for more employees (76 percent), worries that sales won't justify more hiring (71 percent) and worries about the current state of the economy (66 percent). Of the eight reasons owners cited for not hiring, regulations beat out just two -- the worry that their business might not last another year, and "other."
It's unfortunate when small businesses are used as a vehicle for pushing ideological agendas. This isn't to say that small businesses support all regulations all the time. But as Todd Stegman noted, small businesses are most worried about consumer demand and the rising cost of doing business, along with making payroll, healthcare costs and credit availability. That's all according to a wide body of research including our own and the very survey Lincoln cites.
So please, lawmakers, when you sit down to the policy table, don't turn a blind eye to the real issues facing small business. And when it comes to EPA regulations that promote clean and renewable energy, don't believe the hype -- small business owners support 'em.
Follow John Arensmeyer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SmlBizMajority
and when it comes to EPA regulations. clean renewable energy policies are NOT the things Small businesses are typically complaining about.
Whereas pure BS items like the "Leadsafe" program for example is.
The foundations that finance Small Business Majority — which include, according to Mr. Arensmeyer, the Blue Shield of California Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the New York State Health Foundation, and the California Endowment — pursue a mission of social justice, either in health care or more broadly defined. One, Blue Shield of California Foundation, explicitly advocates for “a shared responsibility approach” to universal health care in California.
Perhaps, then, we should not be surprised to learn that when the Small Business Majority surveyed small businesses, it found that they support a mandate. (The surveys, not incidentally, were conducted by Lake Research Partners, a polling firm with an impressive roster of Democrats and progressive causes for clients.)
We should be clear here: The Agenda has no problem with a pay-or-play mandate. But the Small Business Majority has all the hallmarks of a shadowy interest group, starting with a name that conceals more than it reveals.
“Do I and others in the organization belong to a particular political party? Yes,” Mr. Arensmeyer counters. “Look, we have a point of view that health care reform is absolutely essential, and there are more Democrats right now in Washington with that point of view than Republicans. We wish that weren’t the case.”
But when Mr. Arensmeyer insists that his organization is not ideological, he appears to mean that it is not “conservative.” The whole project, frankly, seems fundamentally ideological, and clearly liberal.
A spokesperson, Erin Musgrave, commenting on an Agenda post last week, went even further, describing her organization as “a national, nonpartisan, nonprofit small-business advocacy organization focused on health care reform.” However, two Agenda readers (Diane and Paul) take issue with “nonpartisan,” and rightfully so.
Small Business Majority is nonpartisan only in the most technical sense, in that it is not formally allied with any party. Informally, however, it is allied with the Democratic Party. Mr. Arensmeyer serves as a board member of the Bay Area Democrats, which describes itself as “a network of private citizens active in national Democratic Politics.” Since 2002, Mr. Arensmeyer has given generously, and exclusively, to Democratic candidates, according to F.E.C. records. (“I’ve voted for Republicans,” he offers.)
The actual facts will not support this sarticle. EPA was originally designed to deal with auto emmissions......now look at the monstrosity. Typical government agency. Growing in size and influence at the cost of the consumer. Of course the ridiculous cost of compliance is paid for at the end of the chain. Ahhh the reliable consumer that get nicked at every turn. Check out this nick....Each taxpayer owes $300K as thier individual portion of the debt. At $6K per year and 1.5% interest it will take 100 yearss to pay off. That's$6K that you can't use for anything but dabt and interest. No vacations, clothes, food, rent, school.......100 years. You can do it right?
The right solution is to do whatever necessary to become competitive in the global market. Matching China's environmental regulations is a good start, and creating a non-citizen minimum wage (about half that of citizens) and opening the doors to immigrants will bring back manufacturing (and give those immigrants a good reason to seek citizenship).
When the balance of trade shifts to our favor, then we can sit down at the environmental negotiating table from a position of strength and make a deal that keeps America competitive with the rest of the world.
The BLS keeps track of why employers lay off/fire employees and in the first quarter of 2012, for every ONE person that was laid off due to "Governmental regulations/intervention" over 130 were laid off due to "business demand" issues.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/mslo.t02.htm
Furthermore, for every ONE person laid off due to "regulations/intervention", there were:
A) 85 people laid off due to "Seasonal" factors
B) close to 30 people laid off due to "Financial issues"
C) almost 25 people laid off due to "Organizational changes"
D) more than 45 people laid off due to "Other/miscellaneous
E) one person laid off due to "Disaster/safety" issue
F) three people laid off due to "Production specific" issues OTHER than "Governmental regulations/intervention"
Add it all up and for every ONE person laid off due to "regulations/intervention" by the government, almost THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY were laid of for some other reason. That means that "regulations/intervention" account for about 0.3% of jobs lost in the first quarter of 2012!!!
And you don't know anything about me, so how about you don't show your ignorance by pretending that you do....
Where do these experts get their data? From other "insulated and isolated" college professors and economists?
How do they have the cahonies to even breath this small business is OK nonsense. I have an electrical contacting company. I need to take 34 hours of classes each three year period to keep my license (at a cost of 1200.00) 4 of the hours are to explain all the new government regulations. 6 additional hours to explain all new installation regulations!
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/mslo.t02.htm
Plus they do not mention the difficulty of a person starting a new small business. Try it, then comment.