Here’s a simple test for whether the President is serious about jobs and the economy: Does he rein in the Environmental Protection Agency?
With the debt ceiling issue resolved for the time being, President Obama has stated his intention to “pivot” to focus on jobs and the economy. Economic growth is stagnant, and unemployment is at unacceptable levels—and that’s not even including millions of discouraged people who have dropped out of the workforce altogether. Jobs and economic growth are the right focus.
But there is, understandably, some skepticism that the President is serious. After all, depending on how you count it, he’s pivoted to jobs five to 10 times since taking office, and each time his attention seems to have wavered.
Well, it’s not for nothing that Representative Michele Bachmann (R–MN) called EPA the “Job-Killing Organization of America.” And the Obama EPA has released and has in its pipeline a series of super-expensive regulations that threaten economic havoc:
- A “Boiler MACT” rule that will require manufacturers and other businesses to install expensive technologies to achieve incremental reductions in emissions, with nearly no direct health benefits. EPA estimates this regulation will impact 187,000 boilers at hospitals, hotels, and other small facilities, and it will even affect many churches and apartment buildings. Total cost: $20.7 billion, with as many as 338,000 jobs at risk.
- A “Utility MACT” rule, combined with the just-released Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, that will require power plants to install expensive control technologies for direct benefits that amount to little more than a rounding error. Total cost of both rules: $17.8 billion per year, with as many as 175,000 jobs at risk per year.
- More stringent ozone standards that will hit manufacturing and power plants the hardest, with direct benefits that even EPA admits are nearly nonexistent. Total cost: up to $90 billion per year, with as many as 7.3 million jobs lost by 2020.
- Coal ash regulation and new standards for cooling water intake structures. Total costs: $22 billion to $110 billion, with tens of thousands of jobs at risk.
- Greenhouse gas regulations that will reduce capital investment by tens of billions of dollars per year and cost 476,000 to 1.4 million jobs.
EPA has many more regulations in the works, but these illustrate the point: forcing businesses to waste tens or hundreds of billions of dollars per year on environmental upgrades of dubious value means that money isn’t available to invest in business expansions or create jobs. Higher costs also cut down on business investment—a factory that makes economic sense at a cost of $10 million may not when EPA regulations have jacked the cost up to $30 million.
So the test for the President is simple: Does he side with the regulators and environmentalists or with the American people, who are worried about jobs and the economy? We will know the answer soon. The ozone standards and Boiler MACT rule could go forward at any time, and Utility MACT is due in just a few months.
The President insists he’s serious this time. Let’s hope so.
The markets have presented a fairly quick response to who they think handle econmic matters better. The DOW doubled in value since the Recovery Act was passed, and now with this misinformed economic theary of cuts-only, we see the DOW lose all the gains it made thsi year in a matter of 3 days. 3 days of Republic conservative theory to wipe out the gains made all year from a proven economic theory that government investing in private sector is good for business. All of a suddent, these companies are losing millions/billions in value knowing that the gov't won't be able to invest as much as it should to get the recovery where it needs to be. Why do conservatives want to relive the Hoover era?
Steve, you clearly don't own a manufacturing business or know anyone who does. Go talk to some of us and you'll hear first hand some of the real issues we have in creating jobs thanks to the EPA. If you think companies are evil for going overseas to save costs and think it's about labor rates, you're missing half the story. Regulatory costs and taxes are the other big issue, and in their absence, labor prices would not be enough to warrant a move in many cases. Government confiscates and redistributes wealth. It does not create it. Punishing those who survive the recession with higher taxes only ensures that they will stop hiring and move overseas. How would you respond if you ran a business and made money in this tough economy and then the EPA changed the rules of business and the IRS jacked up your tax rates? How many new people would you hire?
Steve, have you EVER worked for a private organization or KNOW what a manufacturer does and how devastating over-regulation by government is to their productivity and success?
It is unfortunate that there are so many individuals like you who are misguided, uninformed, miseducated and haven't taken the time in their lives to attempt to understand the difference in Government and Private organizations and how they function.
"All of a suddent, these companies are losing millions/billions in value knowing that the gov't won't be able to invest as much as it should…"; seriously? Moron.
pretty ignorant, Steve. You hide behind government, they'll keep you safe and warm and tuck you in at night with a good bedtime story. Hopefully it will be "power divided is power checked," but maybe not, you might learn the truth…
The same old tired GOP talking point . . now skewed to the topic of job creation . .
Black and white thinking again and again from this website . . In this case the problem wrongly suggested is that regulation in any and all forms is the economic killer . . The real problem is free trade . . . which guarantees that our industrial base and our middle class will contiue to be in decline and the gap between the wealthiest and poorest will continue to move toward that of third world nations,
Ridiculous regulation and FREE TRADE, have hurt the republic. If you are in bed with the current administration you get expendible Mexican labor and you get to put Mexican businesses under creating an influs of even more slaves…err um Mexican illegals to work in the factory who now has less competition etc etc.. if you think this is a GOP design, your wrong it happens with both parties, Clinton and HW B were involved up to their necks. The GOP versus Lib argument is to keep us all focused in hte wrong direction.
Really, Steve?
The market is reacting to the lack of cuts and a huge increase in the debt ceiling with an immediate jump in the amount of debt the country owes right after the president signed it into law (>100% current GDP) along with no apparent effort in the foreseeable future to ever pay any of it back.
The 536 in DC are still borrowing well over $1 trillion a year. So to give you the hint – we can't reduce the federal debt until there is no deficit!
I do agree on one thing… it's going to get worse before it will get better. (But that's a much longer conversation to really understand. To start your pondering, though – consider paying off the debt in light of current federal revenues / historical averages of GDP. )
There were no cuts! There are cuts in the amount of growth. Nothing got cut. Instead of growing government by 10% a year it will grow by 9.999% per year. THERE WERE NO ACTUAL CUTS.
Both republicans and democrats are to blame. The only way you can defend the the R's is to stand them next to the D's, kind of like standing next to a cesspit and claiming you smell better. They enlarge the scope, power, size and cost of the federal government just like the D's do, if at a reduced rate. When either get all three houses they go hog wild. The new Boehner plan has no actual reductions and even the reduction in increases they're calling cuts are only promises that they'll work at making it happen later but which no one thinks actually will ever happen. Their party platform suggests they want to expand the powers of the federal government into the area of marriage definition, hardly the states rights folks they claim.
But the real problem is not the R's and the D's, it's the people who vote for these exponents of ever bigger, more centralized, more powerful and more expensive government. If the American people didn't want it, they wouldn't vote for it. We've become socialists, even the conservatives, expecting the government to do the robbing for us. The welfare breeder has her food stamps and those baby checks, young couple just starting out expect the government to get banks to loan them money they may not be able to pay back, the middle class guy demands his home mortgage deduction, corporations want their subsidies. When the government became a Santa Clause with tax dollars everyone wanted and everyone thought the other guy didn't deserve any of it. That's how we got here, each saying the other is the moocher when we're all moochers. SSI, Medicare, Medicaid, rebates for taxes you never paid, food stamps for not just life, but generations. And everyone wants it all for "free".