Boehner to Obama: Come clean on cost of new regulations
The only question I have about this is: What took so long?
From a letter Speaker John Boehner sent today to President Obama:
This year the Administration’s current regulatory agenda identifies 219 planned new regulations that have estimated annual costs in excess of $100 million each. That’s almost a 15 percent increase over last year [when there were 191 such regulations], and appears to contradict public suggestions by the Administration this week that the regulatory burden on American job creators is being scaled back. …
I was startled to learn that the EPA estimates that at least one of its proposed rules will cost our economy as much as $90 billion per year. The Administration has not disclosed how many of the other 218 planned rules will cost more than $1 billion, nor identified these rules. This information is of great relevance to the American people, who face so much uncertainty about these new regulatory costs, and to the Congress, where we continue to aim to work with you in relieving unnecessary burdens and helping employers move forward to create jobs.
I am again asking that your Administration provide a list of all pending and planned rulemakings with a projected impact on our economy in excess of $1 billion.
A reporting threshold of only $100 million is far too low. If we only know that each of the 219 new rules would cost at least that amount, we can only say that the aggregate cost is at least $21.9 billion. That’s bad enough — but as Boehner’s letter notes, one of the 219 on its own is projected to cost at least $90 billion. So, the total cost is really at least $111.8 billion, and probably much, much more.
The public ought to know exactly how much more.
Obama can propose all the new stimulus he wants, but any effects will be severely dampened by the $111.8 billion-plus his agencies are taking back out of the economy at the same time. And not even hard-core Keynesians claim there’s a multiplier effect for regulatory costs. This is the bureaucratic version of Bastiat’s broken window fallacy.
A better, no-cost stimulus would be, as I pointed out last week, to put a freeze on these costly new rules.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
209 comments Add your comment
MrLiberty
August 26th, 2011
4:39 pm
And for those who haven’t figured it out already, jobs that are created by either government mandate, government legislation, regulatory requirement, etc. are UNSUSTAINABLE. If they are not the result of market forces, they will not be sustained by the market. When a business hires someone freely to do a task it is because they believe the task they will be doing and the contributions they will be making will add to the bottom line. When they hire someone to comply with regulations they act in response to fear – plain and simple. They do not want to be penalized by the government so they pay protection money in the form of a jobs program that creates paper.
When one looks at jobs created by a government regulation one only sees the jobs. One does not see the jobs that cannot be created elsewhere because those salaries are now gone doing taks that do not add to profitability, the betterment of society, or anything else positive that business delivers. Further, if one is naive enough to actually believe that these regulations are about keeping people safe and secure the deception is complete.
Regulations like SOX and others are typically embraced by big corporations as their protection payoff to the govenrment. While this sounds counterintuitive, know that the Interstate Commerce Commision was proposed by the big railroads to destroy their smaller competitors. It worked like a charm. Complying with regulations is very expensive. It is not a big deal for the big corporations, but may kill a smaller competitor or hinder their ability to grow and better compete with the big guys. Much of the money given in campaign contributions comes from companies who promote regulations to keep their competitors hurting. Government sells the lies beautifully because that’s what they do.
Don’t be a sucker. Government is not here to protect you. It is here to protect their friends. Ending government regulations and empowering marketplace regulation by the consumer should be the goal of everyone wanting to rein in the horrendous behavior of big business.
BuyMadeinUSjobs
August 26th, 2011
4:42 pm
Tiber, Haven’t you heard it takes words to paint the picture:::now where has the wealth gone in the last 20 years;;///to the have’s not the have’-nots . They pay 15% on dividends and less than that on some of the paper they are shuffling. You pay 30% or so on you ordinary income plus payroll taxes of about 10%. property taxes, sales tax, excise tax, gas tax, state, city taxes etc. Man It is not easy to keep up with these $8.00 an hou service jobs. The Have’s stole our retirement savings, why shouldn’t they help pay for social security???
Don’t you think we have to be like Robin Hood and get the money where it is. THE NEW YORK FINANCIALWaLL StreeT, and corporations, who do not hire here. What about some transaction taxes on all that commodity speculation that runs our food and gas prices up, the hedge fund mangers, stock trades CDO trades, excessive CEO’s Bonuses. Don’t you think they need to help pay for social secuity????
Junior Samples
August 26th, 2011
4:47 pm
Mr Liberty…
Thanks you for agreeing that regulations are needed. You stated that SOX 404 was created because of “direct result of government regulations and regulatory failures”.
You are correct. At the time the regulations were not sufficient enough, and Enron (et al.) took advantage. What was legal then, isn’t now. Outside of the obvious (Enron, WorldCom, etc) which businesses closed their doors due to SOX 404? This regulation is only pointed at publicly traded companies. If it was no longer economically feasible due to regulations, they simply took themselves off the exchange. Customers still came in to buy stuff, employees made and sold them goods and services.
Actually, and yes this might be hyperbolic (Tiber), but SOX 404 could be a considered a litmus test for those who think they’re good enough to be on the exchange.
Ayn Rant
August 26th, 2011
4:47 pm
Tiberius …
Deficit spending creates jobs just as well as spending collected revenue. The federal deficit, which is 10% of our GDP provides a commensurate number of jobs and consumer spending. Hacking away at the deficit may be necessary, but it will surely kill jobs and reduce consumer demand.
Lil Bushie Bailout (Revised Upward)
August 26th, 2011
4:47 pm
Jed: All they have done is argue with President Obama about everything.
_________________________________________________________
Yes, it is unfortunate that the idiot Tea Party and Contards are so obstructionist, and insists on a “my way or the highway” approach to spending, taxes, and regulation.
Fixed that for you, buddy!
MrLiberty
August 26th, 2011
4:49 pm
Tiberius – Plenty of people advocate the complete elimination of government, so stop with the ignorant generalities.
http://eng.anarchopedia.org/Anarcho-capitalism
Government is just people, but it is also people with a monopoly on the use of force. If you eliminate government you do not have to eliminate rules, or protection of property, or rights, or life, or liberty. You just eliminate the force in society that has been shown time and time again to be the greatest threat to all of those. Free association among people has been going on quite successfully for millions of years, while in the 20th century alone, governments murdered over 200 million of their own citizens.
Murray Rothbard was probably the greatest advocate for the elimination of government in recent times. He authored dozens of books that have sold millions of copies and his arguments are sound and certainly not based on a belief in an out of control or rule-less society as one generally regards the term anarchy.
There is a lot to be said for the power of the individual over the power of government.
Junior Samples
August 26th, 2011
4:50 pm
Rafe,
Sorry your distraction led you to Viagra. I’ll leave that alone…
MarkV
August 26th, 2011
4:50 pm
Tiberius @ 4:13 pm: “Businessmen create jobs, college professors do not. Therefore, I’ll believe a study on what will or will not create jobs from a businessman more valid than one from a college professor.”
As any such generalization, this statement is — let’s be very generous — silly.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
4:52 pm
Buymade
Have you never read the Constitution? Are you like Obama and just want to make the rules as we go. So we hunt down and take all that money the Wallstreets have and spend it, where do we go next?
There is no Robin Hood Amendment in the US Constitution. We have the tax laws our reps have given us, but even if they wanted to take all the rich had, it is unconstitutional.
How bout I make up a rule that the 48% of Americans that pay no federal income tax have to pay 10% of all their income regardless of the size of their family or their EITC, or anything else. Sounds fair to me.
MrLiberty
August 26th, 2011
4:54 pm
And Tiberius, it will take more time than you have to ever try and explain basic austrian economics to these folks. If they cannot get past the idea that taking from someone to give to someone else is wrong, they are lost. If they cannot see that government has nothing, makes nothing, and can only have something to spend if they take from someone else and that is morally wrong, they are lost.
If any of them wish to go to http://www.mises.org and read all of the free material from this very scholarly institution, they would come away with a great understanding of why government spending is the root of our problems and not the solution. But I am not sure they wish to understand exactly why our economy has failed and why the answers coming from government and clowns like Bernanke will not ever help the situation we are in.
MrLiberty
August 26th, 2011
4:54 pm
But you are certainly to be commended for your efforts in trying to educate them.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
4:54 pm
Junior
OK by me, but do not continue to make that false claim that no one can name a deleterious regulation. There are thousands that hold back our economy and Obummer wants to add thousands more.
Lil Bushie Bailout (Revised Upward)
August 26th, 2011
4:55 pm
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
11:37 am
“The only question I have about this is: What took so long?”
TESTIFY!
_________________________________________________________
Obama doesn’t have to come clean. Follow Bushie’s famous words:
“I’m the commander — see, I don’t need to explain — I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.” –as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
4:57 pm
Ah, the wealth-envy card being played. Only took 4 pages.
We don’t need more money coming in, we need less money going out!
I am not deflecting any blame that irresponsible actions on Wall Street weren’t part of the problem, but Main Street and government enabled them to act that way. Individuals who wanted these people to “Grow my money. I don’t know how you do it and I don’t want to know, just grow it” without any homework being done. The stock market being used not for it’s intended purpose of long-term investment but for Vegas-style short-term gains. Government enabling people who should never buy a home, then backing their loans and selling them as investment opportunities once Glass-Steagal was removed.
It is EVERYONE’S fault that played that game, and NO ONE has a corner on the responsibility market.
I don’t want ANY taxes on capital gains. That money has already been taxed once when it was earned. Why should the government get a second bite at that apple? Because it can? Great excuse! And government has no business in deciding what a private company’s CEO earns. None.
Take your wealth envy elsewhere.
Lil Bushie Bailout (Revised Upward)
August 26th, 2011
5:01 pm
How bout I make up a rule that the 48% of Americans that pay no federal income tax have to pay 10% of all their income regardless of the size of their family or their EITC, or anything else. Sounds fair to me.
___________________________________________________________________
“You work three jobs? … Uniquely American, isn’t it? I mean, that is fantastic that you’re doing that.” –Bushie to a divorced mother of three, Omaha, Nebraska, Feb. 4, 2005
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:02 pm
“Hacking away at the deficit may be necessary, but it will surely kill jobs and reduce consumer demand.”
Actually, it IS necessary, not may be. And yes, it will kill some jobs, but if we’ve gotten to the point where the amount of government jobs we eliminate is so significant that it threatens to put our economy into a tailspin, then we’ve lost sight of any original intent of the Founding Fathers.
Not all government is good or bad. We’ve just gone way too far in thinking that government is and should be the answer to all our troubles.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
5:04 pm
Ann Rant
You are so wrong when you allege that all Gov spending is returned to the economy. Besides foreign aid that you mentioned, just consider these few things. Much of what Gov buys ends up in the landfills, we could have less landfills if not for government. Examples, FEMA Trailers, bottle of emergency water supplies, other emergeny supplies overstocked, asphalt torn up and replaced due to not meeting government standards, excess equipment, trillions of pages of used paper, etc.
We also have left trillions of dollars of defense assets overseas when we pull out of countries willy nilly. We spend billions on earthquake aid in Haiti and Japan, etc.
The government is the most inefficient purchaser and managers in the world. The people can spend their own money better and create more jobs if the government would leave their resources alone.
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:09 pm
“Tiberius – Plenty of people advocate the complete elimination of government, so stop with the ignorant generalities.”
Mr. Liberty, I hope this was said with a smile, because even I won’t go so far as to advocate no government at all, and I’m one of the original individualists!
I believe in our Constitution as written, and that a limited government is needed to protect some people from those who would try to take someone’s life, liberty or property through the use of force or fraud.
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:11 pm
“As any such generalization, this statement is — let’s be very generous — silly.”
Then by all means, MarkV, make the case that a professor in a university setting is responsible for, and knows how to create more jobs than just about every business person on the planet.
Please.
Go ahead.
Don’t let me stop you.
Junior Samples
August 26th, 2011
5:12 pm
No problem Rafe,
Pretty sure I was addressing Tiber, but whatever.
Gotta admit your example is lame. A prescription drug? There’s an industry that certainly needs help.
Fine. Allow Viagra and other “perfomance enhacing” drugs to be sold OTC and we’ll all sit back and watch the economy grow…
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
5:12 pm
Lil Bushie
Well three jobs huh, that was in good times my friend. I don’t think any of us would be lucky enough to find three jobs today. She is probably unemployed in this Obama economy.
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:16 pm
Little Bushie Bailout, the Children’s Table is next door at Jay Bookman’s place.
Some of us are trying to have a semi-serious conversation here.
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:17 pm
Gotta go out and get the canines some food.
They’re staring at me with some pretty determined looks (as in, I’m looking like a pork chop), so I’d better go.
Maybe later. Enjoyed it, folks.
Junior Samples
August 26th, 2011
5:19 pm
Mr Lib.
You say potato, I say potato
You say Austrian, I say Keynesian
Let’s call the whole thing off.
You’re new handle is Dyno, ’cause you like to label everything.
BuyMadeinUSjobs
August 26th, 2011
5:25 pm
Mr. Liberty,, The corporations foreign capital that was brought back in 2003/2005 was not used to create jobs here but to fire workers and hire more overseas and pay big CEO bonuses. Why shouldn’t they pay taxes to help pay for the Navy to keep the sea lanes open????? , They need to get all that foreign made stuff here to sell to us without tariffs, thats the capital/profit they want to bring back without us getting any tax, what about a pay-off to our workers?? Corporations pay what a $1.00 to make a pair of shoes in China and you pay $50.00 for the shoes and that gives them a $49.00 profit to call profit/capital They are probably getting a little worried about a world depression and banks going broke,, but why should we care if it is confiscated by another government unless there are guarantees; it will be used to create permanent jobs here..
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
5:27 pm
Junior
Actually make Viagra OTC punishes the drug companies. They pay big bucks to the politicians to keep them regulated so they can charge more and increase profits. You got to get gov out of picking winners and losers.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
5:29 pm
Buymade
You need some serious economic training my friend. $49 profit?
That Black guy
August 26th, 2011
5:34 pm
BuyMadeinUSjobs
“The corporations foreign capital that was brought back in 2003/2005 was not used to create jobs here but to fire workers and hire more overseas and pay big CEO
bonuses.”
can you prove that with actual numbers? Maybe a linkeepoo?
they look like this: http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1276&Itemid=29
MarkV
August 26th, 2011
5:34 pm
Tiberius @ 5:11 pm: “Then by all means, MarkV, make the case that a professor in a university setting is responsible for, and knows how to create more jobs than just about every business person on the planet.”
OK. Let’s start with your being dishonest. Let’s look at your original assertion:
Tiberius @ 4:13 pm: “Businessmen create jobs, college professors do not. Therefore, I’ll believe a study on what will or will not create jobs from a businessman more valid than one from a college professor.”
Where has that new part, “that a professor in a university setting IS RESPONSIBLE FOR,” come from? (My emphasis).
I will not make a generalization like you have done, but it is quite likely that many professors in a university setting know much more about job creation than “just about every business person on the planet.” The reason is that those professors study the particular field as a major part of their occupation, while an ordinary businessperson is concerned mainly with running his/her business rather than with the complexity of the overall jobs market. It would be like saying that a professor studying and researching the optimization of a car engine knows less about the function of those engines than a businessperson manufacturing one.
Yappy Little Tea Cup Poodle ~ AKA "Fuzzball"
August 26th, 2011
5:37 pm
“Little Bushie Bailout, the Children’s Table is next door at Jay Bookman’s place.”
Plenty of room there since you vacated the seat at the head of the table.
That Black guy
August 26th, 2011
5:42 pm
Tiberius, your little cyber stalker has followed you over. Better watch yourself, he may be boiling the water for the rabbit as we speak.
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:52 pm
“The reason is that those professors study the particular field as a major part of their occupation, while an ordinary businessperson is concerned mainly with running his/her business rather than with the complexity of the overall jobs market.”
Or maybe we can just summarize things and say that those who can, do; those who can’t. teach.
Again, how’d all that book-learning do with the administration these past 2 1/2 years?
Tiberius
August 26th, 2011
5:53 pm
That black guy, I’m a cyber-stalker magnet!
(they HATE it when they get their clocks cleaned by facts and logic)
MarkV
August 26th, 2011
6:01 pm
Tiberius @5:52 pm: “Or maybe we can just summarize things and say that those who can, do; those who can’t. teach.”
Translation: I cannot think of an argument.
“Again, how’d all that book-learning do with the administration these past 2 1/2 years?”
According to Tiberius, book-learning was not used before the past 2 ½ years by other administrations. And apparently book-learning is useless. Shall we go further to book-burning?
Boehner Says Obama Being Disingenuous on Regulatory Burdens – ABC News (blog) | Obama News
August 26th, 2011
6:12 pm
[...] asks Obama to disclose costly regulationsReutersWashington Post (blog) -USA Today (blog) -Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)all 23 news [...]
Michael H. Smith
August 26th, 2011
6:20 pm
Spot on, Rafe.
Ayn Rant
August 26th, 2011
6:21 pm
Rafe Hollister . . .
All the government waste you cite (paper, trash, discarded weapons) was created by people working at jobs. Eliminating that waste will eliminate those jobs.
However, we could eliminate the waste and create new jobs for useful products. How? By stimulating the economy enough to create sufficient consumer demand to attract investment of capital, or by federal borrowing and spending on less wasteful projects.
Our economy has an imbalance between jobs and capital: there’s too much capital and too little consumer demand to provide investment opportunities. We need ways to convert some of the excess capital into consumer spending power. The federal government can do that by borrowing capital to distribute to consumers, not a great idea, or by confiscating (taxing) excess income and capital gains from financial instruments such as hedge funds and derivatives, which are gambling ventures that do not create American jobs.
Hillbilly D
August 26th, 2011
6:42 pm
Regarding the EPA, it’s the only thing President Nixon got right. In 1969 the Cuyahoga river actually caught fire. But I’m sure that the companies resonsible for that would stop what they were doing on their accord, right?
How many remember back in the late 50’s, early 60’s when Atlanta dumped their sewage into the South River? It was covered in soap suds and you could smell the thing a good while before you ever got to it, going down Bouldercrest Road.
Not all regulations are bad.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
6:43 pm
Ann
The better way to get that capital flowing is to eliminate taxes on the corporations holding it. Lower corporate tax rate to zero, increase depreciation allowances, do not tax inventory, eliminate capital gains tax. When they create all these new jobs the government can salivate over all their new found income, plus more corporations will move to the US and create even more jobs.
I think this is what they call a growing economy, what you advocate is a zero sum game, just get their money cause we need it and they are the ones with the money. Grow the economy and create more money!
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
6:50 pm
Micha
Glad you are aboard to stymie the liberal swarm. All 26% of those who approve of Obummers handling of the economy showed up here today.
Now that you are here to protect, serve, and defend truth, justice, and the American way, I think I will do my environmental duty and get me a piece of one of those methane producing animals.
MarkV
August 26th, 2011
6:50 pm
It is not just some isolated cases like Cuyahoga river or South River. Free market is the most viable economic system ever devised, but government regulations are absolutely necessary to curb the excesses. The government in a democratic society has not been instituted just for the benefit of the profit makers, but for the benefit of all people.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
6:51 pm
Can’t type too hungry that should be directed to Michaell H Smith, great American.
Rafe Hollister
August 26th, 2011
6:52 pm
can’t punctuate either; out of here.
Michael H. Smith
August 26th, 2011
6:53 pm
“too little consumer demand”?
Nah, just too few consumers with money to relieve the pent-up demand.
Logical way to change this picture is (the private sector) to start making things in this country again that not only we will buy but that others around the world are willing to buy from us. This was covered by Professor Peter Morici in a OP ED he wrote for the AJC. Lowering the corporate tax rates to compete with other countries and reviewing&eliminating counter productive regulations in order to compete with other countries is a good staring point that shouldn’t require a great deal of government borrowing&spending to accomplish. The rest mostly deals with trade, trade arguments & currency pegs.
What we certainly don’t need at this late date with trillions of dollars in debt&millions of jobs lost, is another failed stimulus that touts GUB’MENT projects&programs – what part of “porkulus one” wasn’t a BIG GUB’MENT non-job producing failure already?
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
August 26th, 2011
7:01 pm
“Translation: I cannot think of an argument.”
MarkV, your inability to accept any prevous answers does not constitute a failure on my part.
And the book-LEARNing / BURNing hyperbole? Proof positive you you haven’t a clue about me, what I believe or virtually anything else.
Book learning is fine, as far as it goes. But too many of those people who lived in academia and didn’t ever practice their chosen profession in the real world have done nothing to cover themselves in glory as regards our economy these past few years. But if you believe so, again, make your case.
As you failed so miserably to do earlier.
Tiberius - Your lightning rod of hate!
August 26th, 2011
7:20 pm
Michael, I’m fine with regulatory reform, but I’m not buying into the corporate tax cut idea, unless it is part of flattening the overall tax rates in addition to eliminating subsidies and loopholes.
Tax rates can come down later once our deficit starts dropping significantly.
marko
August 26th, 2011
7:21 pm
Cut taxes, deregulate and everything will turn out great.. Remember Kyle, that was the song Ronnie was singing the night you proposed to your wife. Must give you a warm fussy glow all over.
It’s been years since Wall Street hit us up for 700 billion. A couple of years since BP pumped millions of gallons of oil into the gulf. Heck no coal miners have been crushed to death in ages. Months are ages when it comes to a Republican’s attention span.
I have no idea where you come up with the numbers you throw around. Most seem to be pulled kicking and screaming from places the sun doesn’t shine.
Just out of curiosity, have you ever considered how much money we could save by simply closing the prisons. We have millions of people locked up. It’s one area where America still holds a commanding lead over the rest of the world. I estimate that we could save 111.8 billion dollars [ just a silly number I read somewhere] by closing the prisons. To a man. those guys are sincerely sorry for what they did. They all promised that they would be good boys from now on. The police realized that they wouldn’t be needed anymore. They’ve all decided to be hedge fund managers. .I’m telling you happy days are here again.
Michael H. Smith
August 26th, 2011
7:36 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! – Do you buy into the idea that in Ireland the corporate tax rate is 12% while here in the U.S. it is 35%? Well that is exactly how things stand and it is worse compared to other countries that have even lower corporate tax rates.
Nah, if we don’t cut our corporate tax rates we might as well tell business just go somewhere else we don’t want you and your business here in the good old USA.
Buy it or not, for a 23% or better tax rate advantage business will say: We’ll gladly take our business anywhere but your good old USA and will happily remain there with 23% more profit in our pockets.
But for what it is worth apart form corporate taxes, though, not preclusive of them: I personally oppose taxing business period, support ending ALL not just the few subsidies&loopholes you’d probably like to end but END ALL subsidies&loopholes including the one you’d like to keep and I support a flat tax to replace the current progressive-regressive marxist-socialist tax system we have.
MarkV
August 26th, 2011
7:55 pm
Tiberius – Your lightning rod of hate! @7:01 pm : “As you failed so miserably to do earlier.”
Oh no! Another one with strong powers of self- deception.
“And the book-LEARNing / BURNing hyperbole? Proof positive you you haven’t a clue about me, what I believe or virtually anything else.”
I do not care to have a clue about you. I go strictly by what you write.
marxo
August 26th, 2011
7:57 pm
I use to wonder why Kyle allowed certain comments made on his blog. Then I read his reasoning, understood most of it, even accepted it. You have only become more correct by greater degree Kyle, as they do only make the rest of us appear all the more intelligent. Comrade Lenin’s point is well taken: “Useful Idiots”