Republicans aim to end all "job-killing regulations" -- especially those that, according to House Speaker John Boehner, are "strangling" business with detailed requirements over health, safety, the environment, corporate governance and finance.
Here's another instance of where the White House's attempt to preempt Republican rhetoric (the president said last week his administration would root out all nonsensical and inefficient regulation) ends up legitimizing it -- and re-framing the public debate around an issue that's hardly central to what ails America.
The reason we have continued sky-high unemployment has nothing to do with excessive regulation. There was no sudden outpouring of federal regulation in 2007 before the economy tanked and millions lost their jobs.
If anything, the economy unraveled because of too little regulation. Wall Street went on a binge, remember? The Street could get almost free money from the Fed (which had reduced interest rates to near zero) and do just about whatever it wanted with it. Thirty years of deregulation, culminating with the dismantling of Glass-Steagall and the abject failure of regulators at the Fed and the SEC to use the authority they still had, enabled the Street to make bundles of money and expose the rest of the economy to unprecedented levels of risk.
The Fed had slashed interest rates in the early 2000s, by the way, because the corporate looting scandals at Enron, Worldcom, Sunbeam, and other major corporations had sapped investor confidence. Those scandals themselves wouldn't have happened had securities regulations been stronger and better enforced.
No one wants unnecessary regulation. And rules ought to be clear and simple. But let's be real. Most of the complexity and verbiage that finds its way into the Code of Federal Regulations is the result of industry lawyers and lobbyists who exploit every potential ambiguity to avoid doing what lawmakers intend -- thereby necessitating ever-more detailed and picayune rules to close the loopholes. It's an endless cat-and-mouse game that runs from regulatory agencies through the courts and then back again. And it's occurring right now, as regulations are being drawn up to put the health care and financial laws into effect.
There's no necessary trade-off between regulations and jobs. Regulations that are designed well -- that tell industry what to achieve by a certain date but don't dictate exactly how (such as fuel economy standards) -- can generate innovation as companies compete to find the most efficient solutions. And innovations can lead to more jobs as they spawn new products and industries.
Even where there is a trade-off -- where regulations are costly and those costs result in fewer jobs -- it still makes sense to opt for regulation when the public benefits exceed the costs to industry. We could have millions more jobs tomorrow if we eviscerated all health and safety regulations and allowed our air to turn yellow and our rivers and lakes to become fetid stinkholes. But that would be dumb.
"Job-killing regulations" is a silly phrase that substitutes for real thought. And it's a distraction from the hard work of creating more jobs in America.
Robert Reich is the author of Aftershock: The Next Economy and America's Future, now in bookstores. This post originally appeared at RobertReich.org.
"Job-killing regulations" is a silly phrase that substitutes for real thought. And it's a distraction from the hard work of creating more jobs in America.
i'm sorry that this is the way people think! regulations is a issue but it's not those in this letter. they missed the real one's.. that make companies run away, move to other countries. or have to shut down. sorry it took unions to drag this country down... hey califoria water rights to the famers was shut down because of the tree huggers. over a planet they can place in a new location. but read "rules for radicals" obama's play book. spend your union checks on high gas prices, food prices, and obey shera law's because your union thinks. obama will take care of you.
Our congress and many Americans who don't know poverty is number 1 killer think war on terror was right way to spend that trillion. As usual we let emotional reaction drive us rather then facts of what kills the most Americans.
Business will do all it can to evade responsibility, social or otherwise, for its actions in the name of short-term profit and will exploit any loophole or attempt to litigate it to death. Example, Company X finds it "cost-effective" to dump chemical waste rather than responsible disposal BUT regulation states they can not dump the waste , so what does company X do? They "discharge" the waste and claim that is not the same thing. It becomes a case of cat and mouse .
Republicans being "profit over people/planet" short-term types , think the solution is simply to tear up the regulations and let companies rip-off,pollute, poison or damage any and everything in the name of "shareholder value" or what not. It simply is ethically dubious at best , reckless and callous endangerment , fraud, and murder at worst.
Before anyone can write an article, they must first obtain a license from the Federal Department of media. They must submit a 12 page application showing proof of at least a Masters degree in Composition.
Once the license has been granted, $1,000 fee must be paid to process the application.
When an article is written , it must be reviewed by a state editor.
The article will not be reviewed for content because that would be against free speech, but rather for punctuation and sentence structure. There is a $10 fee that must be submitted with each 1 page of the article. The wait time for approval MUST be under 15 days.
Every year, any licensed writer, must attend a writing class of at least 40 hours in order that the improve their writing skills. Not attending the class would;d be grounds for removing the license.
Gotcha.
Of course, if you'd read the article you'd see that he's already MADE that point. HIS point is that the Republicans aren't talking about REFORMING the regulatory structure, they're talking about REPEALING the regulatory structure, and that President Obama walked right into their point of view when he said much the same thing.
If you had a 1975 chevy, where just about everything on the car was broken, it would not be cost effective to repair and replace the car. Repair and replace might cost $100,000. A new car....$20,000.
I may be suggesting that we take the bus rather than replace the car or buy a new one. Maybe even hitch hike.
Egypt is a powerful inspiration.
Aren't you getting tired of getting schooled on this lie? Cause I'm sure getting tired of schooling rightwingnutjobs about it.
Glass-Steagall gutted independent insurance and changed the face of "Banking" to "Financial Services". What a mistake, and it is still going on today. What a shame.
I guess this means neither political party knows how to encourage actual job creation!
One thing is for sure, zlohcuc.........the more govt adds rules, regulations, licenses, taxes, and/or encumbrances for employers or potential employers (small business owners) the MORE difficult it is for them to keep or add employees (job creation)!
Although many of you intellectuals with no business experience whatsoever believe business owners should be motivated to DISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH, most business owners are in business to make a profit for themselves, their families, and their key employees.
If they are able to increase the size of their business and add jobs it is NOT because YOU or those in need of entitlements will benefit. However, if they grow and add jobs and as a result more money is distributed, it is most often because govt does NOT place unnecessary restrictions or MORE regulations and taxes on them.
You are aware that corporations are sitting on nearly 2 trillion dollars worth of cash and many of the largest global corporations like Exxon Mobile paid NO US taxes for years. Talk about entitlements all you want, let me know when the subsidies for these gigantic leechs are eliminated and you will at least SOUND like you know what you are talking about. Do you think the victims of the BP disaster, the WV and UT mining debacles, the gas blast this week in Allentown would give a rats ass about your flippent characterization of"unnecessary restrictions" ? I already know the answer but that will never stop folks like you from imagining that profit always trumps people. See events in egypt if you want to muse about what may happen next in your scenaio were ordinary citizens are left with nothing.
This will result in two WONDERFUL things that rightwingdumbfucks always seem to forget:
infrastructure results in better conditions FOR ALL, including your precious rich people (who will never let you in, no matter how much you shill for them...)
more money in the hands of those who SPEND money results in more demand for goods and services, which results in more money getting into the hands of small business owners, which results in more jobs!
Another area I am familiar with was the Sarbanes Oxley law. Firms spent millions of dollars for compliance by hiring outside consultants to examine their internal controls. Sarbanes Oxley was a big waste. The law is largely ineffective as we have witnessed from the Wall Street bankers testimonies.
Obviously, some laws need to be reviewed and weighed for effectiveness.
http://www.medcitynews.com/2010/03/medical-device-tax-would-mostly-target-the-biggest-companies/
1) To rein in the excesses that can happen due to practically unlimited funds available to big business.
2) To ensure that we have public safety, even if it costs a few extra cents in the final product!
its nothing more than comedy to me.