Earlier this week, I was on MSNBC's Up With Chris Hayes about jobs, the Occupy Wall Street movement and other issues. During the show I said I'm a fan of health and safety -- not regulations. I said that some regulations have created jobs, since the industries being watched have to comply with the rules. For example, technological requirements can spur engineering improvement, which means employing engineers.
Well, the right wing went crazy. People who aren't even from my congressional district called my office and blasted me over email and the Twitterverse. I had gored one of their sacred cows -- deregulation -- and they howled loudly.
So who's right? Have health and environmental rules cost America jobs, or not? I said no. Here's what I'm talking about:
Environmental Protection
Environmental spending creates jobs in engineering, manufacturing, construction, materials, operations and maintenance. Vehicle emissions standards directly sparked the development and application of a wide range of automotive technologies that are now found throughout the global automobile market. The vehicle emissions control industry employs approximately 65,000 Americans with domestic annual sales of $26 billion. The worldwide market for environmental goods and services is worth over $700 billion, a size comparable to the aerospace and pharmaceutical industries.
If you want to know more about the wrongheaded jobs versus environmental protections argument check out the report, "Regulatory Uncertainty: A Phony Explanation for our Jobs Problem" by EPI's Larry Mishel.
You know the situation: roughly 14 million Americans are out of work and 46.2 million live in poverty. The Republicans have held the House for almost 300 days but they've introduced no jobs bills. In fact, they shot down President Obama's jobs bill like skeet. What have Republicans done? They've pushed for even more de-regulation in the name of "creating jobs."
One last point:
Moody's economist Mark Zandi, an advisor to John McCain's presidential campaign, estimates the $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by the House Republicans will cost the economy 700,000 jobs by 2012. Wrongheaded policies.
Rep. Keith M. Ellison represents Minnesota's 5th Congressional District and Co-chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Follow Rep. Keith Ellison on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keithellison
Dr. David Liepert: Should Muslims Occupy Wall Street Too?
Rep. Keith Ellison: America's Best Days are Ahead - Huffington Post
Rep. Keith Ellison: Occupy Wall Street's Real ... - Huffington Post
Rep. Keith Ellison: This Is Our Moment - Huffington Post
We'll all be fartin' through silk in no time!
and how many jobs don't exist because small business are buried in paperwork and cannot hire more productive workers...??
Medicare is an example of massive paperwork, fraud and waste - and all of it is government...
as always, you are correct!
I'm glad you are in a leadership position, and I love the Prog Caucus.
I still remember the disgraceful objections to your religion when you were elected and used the Koran (sp?) to be sworn in. You have added richness and capability to the House, and I'm glad you're there!
Jeff Drummond
Pollution? Sure. Excessive risk? Yep. Fraud? Of course.
And so businesses want to pollute, take risks with OPM (other people's money) and cheat. It's profitable.
Congratulations on being duped if you support deregulation. Have you already forgotten about the recession?
Perhaps the best way would be to have a review of every regulation and determine which ones are good rather than decrying all regulation.
What was it Obama said? "I know that America bears its share of responsibility for the mess that we all face. But I also know that we need not choose between a chaotic and unforgiving capitalism and an oppressive government-run economy."
Seems reasonable.
Businesses will NOT do anything for the common good unless MANDATED to do so.
all companies unless founded by buddhist monks only care about making a profit, and if they
can throw their trash outside the building, and not have the expense of a trash pick up, then
that is what they will do. if they want to burn that pile and pollute the air because its a cheap
alternative, that's what they will do. AND ALWAYS HAVE DONE. And unless an environmental scientist comes along and shows them evidence of the condequences that they may or may not be aware exist, they may or may not say, gee that's too bad. but the company leaders can also say, don't care or i'm not going to change my ways - we don't want to reduce our profits to fix the problems. THERE MUST BE RULES AND REGULATIONS. OR WE BECOME SOMOLIA.
of course some rules and regulations are silly, over the top, regressive - so fix those - but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. AND NEVER TRUST BUSINESSES TO POLICE THEMSELVES.
Regulations are fine to level the playing field and insure public safety - too bad some industries just pay off to get the regulations bent for them - coal power industry comes to mind....
Promoting the general welfare requires that government regulate.
The level of stupidity of people who think that a state of anarchy is preferable to regulations and their enforcement is predictable, however, given the level of misinformation provided to them on hate radio and Faux news.
Government doesn't exist to "regulate" commerce - essentially getting between willing buyers and sellers and outlawing transactions that would otherwise occur, and charging taxes to pay for the regulator.
We give government a monopoly on the use of force, the others who use force are considered criminals or foreign enemies.
It seems there's a lot of liberals who believe government should tell people the "right" way to do things, and only what is permitted is legal. Like if the mirror in your bathroom is too high for someone in a wheelchair, then since you're not doing the right thing, you should be subject to a lawsuit (enriching a lawyer and someone who goes around looking for violators of "regulations").
Liberals ignore the most dangerous criminals of all - and that would be those in government. They don't prosecute each other, they set their own compensation (does Bell CA ring a bell?), they make laws from which they are exempt (insider trading, social security, speech laws, etc.) and the biggest killers of men are governments. Now US citizens can be detained or killed without a trial based on "secret" evidence.
The level of stupidity of people who think state control of everything is preferable to limited government is predictable given the level of misinformation provided to them by government, MSM and government schools.
Not to protect "our liberties", but 'our freedoms'. But as you know, the quote is from the Declaration of Independence and not from any document that has legal standing. What governs us is,
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." (preamble to the Constitution)
Nowhere in the preamble is there a statement that our government is established to provide free rein to the people.
"The level of stupidity of people who think state control of everything is preferable to limited government is predictablÂe"
I would say that 'the level of stupidity of people who think there are liberals who think the state should control everything' is mind-boggling.
-- http://www.jstor.org/pss/145292
Second, I have nothing against certifications that don't prevent people from engaging in a particular activity. There are various certification programs around certifying that you have fulfilled the requirements set by the certifying body. However, you can still practice the trade or profession without such certification. Translators, for instance, can pass tests to become certified by the American Translators Association (http://www.atanet.org/certification/) or the Chartered Institute of Linguists (http://www.iol.org.uk/qualifications/trust.asp).
I have taken none of these tests and am certified by none of these organisations. Nonetheless, I am happily making a living as a translator. My customers are no less happy because I hold none of these certifications. However, to actively impede someone's attempts to practice a trade or profession when that person has committed no fraud or force against anyone else is simply unconscionable.
'In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them.'
-- http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks01/0100021.txt
Very interesting process.