May 23, 2013

Posts

Government “gone wild” and a tale of 2 businessmen

September 30, 2011 By Carol Greenberg

I had the pleasure of speaking with Brett McMahon, V.P. of Business Development of Miller and Long, a construction company based in D.C. which specializes in concrete work; and Phil Hoppman, President of Big D MetalWorks in Dallas.

Below are their stories of “government regulation gone wild” and the failure of the Obama administration to create and maintain jobs at a reasonable cost.

Brett McMahon

Mr. McMahon is a spokesman for the Free Enterprise Alliance’s Halt The Assault campaign which exposes intrusive government and how government regulations are destroying jobs. Below is one of their videos:

Mr. McMahon also authored the article Job One: Kill the Jobs Bill. One of his shocking findings about the President’s “we have to pass this plan NOW” is:

In looking through the particulars of the President’s proposed job creation plan, if the estimated 1.9 million jobs are added it will be at a cost of $235,000 each with a total bill cost of $447B [emphasis mine]. Though it may be a slightly better deal for taxpayers than “Stimulus 1”, it still is nowhere near the type of recovery this economy needs and leaves us back at the original problem.

The main focus of our conversation was the onerous regulations and demands of the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board). His company has been in business for 64 years and is not now, and has never been a union shop. His feeling is the present Administration has been selective in which companies they target (Gibson Guitar ex.) and using a “prosecutorial  attitude.” He sited a case where his company, even though it uses E-verify, has been raided by the Dept. of Labor and DHS to ensure all his company’s employees are not illegals. The Dept. of Labor even had employees stationed on the top of a hill overlooking one of Mr. McMahon’s construction sites to “ensure” no labor laws were broken.

We discussed the regulation by the NLRB which is scheduled to go into effect on November 14 requiring businesses to post a notice for their employees about their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. In Mr. McMahon’s opinion there are only 6 postings in the law he deems are legal and this one is not. He feels the NLRB should be made to prove they have the authority to do this and everything the Executive Branch sends down the pike should be challenged and many agencies are unnecessary, a taxpayers’ waste and onerous and harmful  to businesses and job creation.

When you gore everyone’s ox, everyone has a stake in the game.

Was one of his salient quotes and that the Boeing case in South Carolina is a prime example.

The outcome of the Boeing case affects every company and individual in the country, including Obamacare. The mistake Obama is making with Boeing is that every businessman in the country knows about it and it will be something still seen in the next administration. There is no need for the NLRB, which has its own little “court” and makes decisions which have been reversed, those decisions have been reversed, ad infinitum.

According to Mr. McMahon the NLRB has 54 offices, 710 full time employees and an annual budget of $280 million. In March of 2010 President Obama recess-appointed Craig Becker, Associate General Counsel of SEIU to the NLRB. Becker’s term ends December 31 of this year and he is probably the most radical of the NLRB’s Board.

In an interesting note which many may be unaware of, Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) has been holding the House in pro forma session in order to block President Obama from recess-appointing Lafe Solomon as General Counsel of the NLRB and Becker to a full term which would normally expire at the end of Obama’s present administration.

Solomon was named Acting General Counsel in June of 2010 and can hold that position for 210 days without Congressional approval. A General Counsel is independent from the Board and is responsible for the investigation and prosecution of unfair labor practice cases. Solomon is the person who has accused Boeing of unfair labor practices by opening a new plant in South Carolina. It is doubtful that Congress will give Solomon the appointment as many Democrats represent right-to-work states and do not want to alienate their constituents, hence Boehner’s decision to enter into pro forma session.

In 2007 Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) held the Senate in pro forma session in order to block recess appointments by President George Bush so this is not a new tactic by either party.

Mr. McMahon is committed to educating the public about these issues and the proposed “Jobs Act” from Obama, which which is an onerous, 155 page bill which is certain to make the job situation worse.

Please take a look at the website Halt the Assault.

Phil Hoppman

Mr. Hoppman runs a business out of Dallas specializing in unique metallurgy architecture. Growing up poor, he focused on starting a business and building it on his own through hard work. Though not having the same nature of problems in his business as Mr. McMahon has had, with unions, the NLRB and Dept. of Labor, the number of his employees is down from 60-70 to 30-40 because of the poor business environment.

John Taylor of Stanford University has done studies of the relationship between unemployment and business growth over the last 20 years. His study found that unemployment grows inversely to business growth. So when unemployment is higher, business growth goes down. And with all the new regulations for businesses it has become an increasingly difficult environment for those businesses to survive.

He shares Mr. McMahon’s frustration with the regulatory and unemployment situation in America at this time.

Mr. Hoppman “did the math” on Obama’s proposed jobs bill quoted by Mr. McMahon in his article, and tells me the cost per job could even approach the $500,000 mark. With the deficit over $14 trillion this is simply untenable and will cost our children and grandchildren’s future economic vitality.

Writer’s commentary: Let’s hope as both gentlemen above do, that Obama’s “We have to pass it now” Job’s Bill is DOA and doesn’t rise from the dead.

Crossposted at Unified Patriots

Share
Filed Under Uncategorized Tagged With Big D MetalWorks, Boeing, Brett McMahon, Craig Becker, Halt the Assault, Harry Reid, Jobs, John Boehner, Lafe Solomon, Miller and Long, NLRB, Phil Hoppman

TN Rep introduces bill to deliver relief from onerous NLRB

September 27, 2011 By Carol Greenberg
Rep. Scott DesJarlais, R-TN

Rep. Scott DesJarlais, R-TN

The National Labor Relations Board is under fire for attempting to implement job-killing regulations. Their newest regulation to take affect on November 11 would require businesses to post a notice for employees as far as their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. A copy of that notice is here. Part of the notice says under the NLRA you have the right to:

  • Organize a union to negotiate with your employer concerning your wages, hours, and other terms and conditionsof employment.
  • Form, join or assist a union.
  • Bargain collectively through representatives of employees’ own choosing for a contract with your employer setting your wages, benefits, hours, and other working conditions.
  • Discuss your wages and benefits and other terms and conditions of employment or union organizing with your co-workers or a union.
  • Take action with one or more co-workers to improve your working conditions by, among other means, raising work-related complaints directly with your employer or with a government agency, and seeking help from a union.
  • Strike and picket, depending on the purpose or means of the strike or the picketing.
  • Choose not to do any of these activities, including joining or remaining a member of a union.

One Tennessee House Rep takes exception to this. Below is legislation he has introduced in an attempt to counteract this:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Representative Scott DesJarlais (TN-04) has introduced H.R.2854, the Employer Free Choice Act. This legislation will repeal a rule promulgated by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) forcing employers to prominently display posters containing information on workers’ rights to unionize and bargain collectively. If not repealed, businesses will be required to have the postings completed by November 14, 2011.

“It is unacceptable for the NLRB to force businesses to display posters that serve as nothing more than a de facto endorsement of unionization by the federal government,” said Representative DesJarlais. “If employers want to distribute information on the ways employees can unionize then that should be their choice – not Washington bureaucrats. Clearly, this arbitrary mandate is simply another favor for big labor made possible by their friends in the Obama administration.”

Rep. DesJarlais in a video below explains during an interview with Keith Hayes, executive VP of VIAM Manufacturing, Inc.:

“We take great pride in making sure that our employees fully understand their rights, which includes the right to union representation and the right to choose that representation. We do not need, nor is there a reason for the federal government to force us to advertise on behalf of unions in our facility,” said Keith Hayes.

Accompanying Representative DesJarlais on his visit to VIAM Manufacturing, INC. and helping to lead the conversation on this ruling was Judd Matheny (R-Tullahoma), Speaker Pro Tempore of the Tennessee House of Representatives.

“The issue of organizing is one best left to employees and the businesses concerned. A Federal mandate to guarantee one person or group’s rights over another’s is un-American and another example of an intrusion into the rights of the individual states,” said Rep. Judd Matheny.

This legislation has been referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce, of which Representative DesJarlais is a member.

“Millions of American workers are unemployed, yet the Obama labor board continues to pursue an activist agenda that is killing jobs and harming the competitiveness of our workforce. If President Obama won’t hold them accountable, Congress will. I want to thank Dr. DesJarlais for bringing this proposal forward and for his commitment to reversing the job-destroying agenda of the Obama NLRB,” said Representative John Kline, Chairman of the Education and the Workforce Committee.

Businesses may visit and fill out this form at American Job Creators to tell Washington how they can deliver effective and efficient regulations to ensure more jobs can be created without onerous demands of those businesses.

Crossposted at Unified Patriots

Share
Filed Under Uncategorized Tagged With American Job Creators, H.R. 2854, Jobs, NRLB, Rep. Judd Matheny, Rep. Scott DesLarlais, VIAM Manufacturing

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) is no friend of veterans

September 25, 2011 By Carol Greenberg

Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) has never been a friend of Conservatives. He has received a rating of 0.00 from the American Conservative Union. His picture is below.

220px-Tom_Harkin_official_portrait

Harkin has also never been a “friend” of for-profit higher education facilities, which include trade schools and on-line colleges. At least when it applies to our veterans.

According to an analysis by Brigadier General John Castlellaw, for-profit education facilities many times offer veterans the best choice for any post-military education due to their busy work schedules and family demands:

For-profit schools are particularly valuable for veterans. Unlike traditional college freshmen, veterans often return home to busy schedules dominated by work and family. They require the flexible course schedules and online classes that are the hallmarks of for-profit schools. As shown by my example, the needs of veterans often cannot be met by traditional nonprofit schools.

On the Department of Veterans’ Affairs website one can obtain a list of “approved” higher education facilities and how much they will pay toward a veteran’s education.

In spite of being a former navy pilot, Harkin has been targeting these for-profit facilities telling the public they, for the most part, don’t provide the same standards of education as not-for-profit education facilities. According to a press release on September 22 via his website, Harkin has these bulleted points:

  • Of the ten educational institutions collecting the most V.A. benefits, eight are for-profit schools. Together, those eight companies collected $1 billion last year (24% of all benefits).
  • The cost to taxpayers to send a veteran to a for-profit school is more than double the cost of a public university education: $10,900 vs. $4,900.
  • Of the eight for-profit college companies receiving the most G.I. Bill funds, a combined 409,437 students withdrew from degree programs within one year of enrolling.
  • The cost to federal taxpayers is out of proportion to the number of veterans served. For-profit schools collected more than one-third (37 percent) of all G.I. Bill funds, but trained only 25 percent of veterans, while public colleges and universities received 40 percent of benefits but trained 59 percent of veterans.

In a “study” Harkin did on for-profit v. non-for profit centers, he particularly calls out the for-profit Apollo Group which runs the University of Phoenix claiming they received $210 million from the G.I. Bill last year and that a better use of taxpayer dollars would be sending veterans to not-for profit schools. However the University of Phoenix has acquired “Yellow Ribbon Status” under the G.I. bill (FYI one has to put in a specific state and educational facility in this website, it will not save the link) which means that:

Currently the Post-9/11 GI Bill pays up to the highest public in-state undergraduate tuition and fees. Effective August 1, 2011 the Post-9/11 GI Bill will pay all pay all public school in-state tuition and fees or up to $17,500 annually for a private school.

Now let’s jump over to the University of Iowa in Harkin’s home state. They are a not-for profit university and have also acquired “Yellow Ribbon” status. The University of Iowa authored the Veterans Task Force Report which is an

Assessment of current services and long-term strategies to enhance and provide support for veterans throughout their collegiate career.

Some initial key points:

  • The report talks about military students being a potential “yield” to the University and recommends targeting active duty and disabled veteran populations (Appendix B).
  • It also touts the fact that University of Iowa is designated “military friendly” by GIJOBS.com. This so happens to be the same group that Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) himself attacked at his press conference earlier this morning, stating that the rating is based on recruitment numbers.

Notable quotes are:

P.1 – Appendix B: “Focus on active duty and disabled veteran populations, as well as their dependents, as the University transitions to military friendly campus.

P.3: “Currently, there are over 350 veterans and 35 active duty personnel attending Iowa. Increasing veteran enrollment by 100 students a year would result an additional $800,000 tuition income annually, with a potential $2 million additional revenue for the Iowa City community.”

But the most interesting factoid about Harkin and his stance is his wife just happens to be on the Board of Visitors at the University of Iowa and  she is also on the Iowa State Board of Regents that governs Iowa’s public universities. The report was reviewed by the State Board of Regents. Her picture is below:

Ruth Harkin

Perhaps a conflict of interest here, Senator Harkin? Attempting to steer by use of your Congressional office taypayer dollars to a university whom your wife has an alliance with?

Ironically Harkin used the G.I. Bill to attend law school after his navy career, calling it:

“one of the federal government’s smartest investments.” Now, he says, Congress needs to act to ensure veterans who use the benefits get a quality education.”

Whatever the cost Senator Harkin, our veterans are entitled to the best education this country can offer and which is the most convenient for them and their families, given their service to advance freedom of this great United States.

Crossposted at Unified Patriots

Share
Filed Under Uncategorized Tagged With Apollo Group, Brig. Gen. John Castlellaw, Department of Veterans Affairs, G.I. Bill, Iowa Board of Regents, Rugh Harkin, Sen. Tom Harkin, universities, University of Iowa, University of Phoenix, V.A. benefits

You thought Solyndra was bad, watch out for the *NAT GAS Act*

September 23, 2011 By Carol Greenberg

By now almost everyone knows the scandal Solyndra has become. The Institute for Energy Research put together this 2 minute video as a summary:

But how many of you are aware about a hearing on the NAT GAS Act? Or New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act? Probably not many. Yesterday the House Ways and Means Committee held a hearing on this proposed act. H.R. 1380 was introduced by Rep. John Sullivan (R-OK). It has 183 co-sponsors, a mixture of Republicans and Democrats.  Below is the summary:

New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act of 2011 – Amends the Internal Revenue Code to: (1) allow an excise tax credit through 2016 for alternative fuels and fuel mixtures involving compressed or liquefied natural gas; (2) allow an income tax credit through 2016 for alternative fuel motor vehicles powered by compressed or liquefied natural gas and make Indian tribal governments eligible for such credit; (3) modify the tax credit percentage for alternative fuel vehicles fueled by natural gas or liquefied natural gas; (4) allow a new tax credit for the production of vehicles fueled by natural gas or liquefied natural gas; and (5) extend through 2016 the tax credit for alternative fuel vehicle refueling property expenditures for refueling property relating to compressed or liquefied natural gas and allow an increased credit for such property.

Requires the Secretary of Energy to provide funding to improve the performance, efficiency, and integration of natural gas powered motor vehicles and heavy-duty on-road vehicles. Authorizes the Secretary to make grants to manufacturers of light and heavy duty natural gas vehicles for the development of engines that reduce emissions, improve performance and efficiency, and lower cost.

Expresses the sense of Congress that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should streamline the process for certification of natural gas vehicle retrofit kits to promote energy security and provide incentives to encourage and reward manufacturers who produce natural gas powered vehicles.

Amends the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to allocate funds for vehicles that are repowered or converted to operate on an alternative fuel.

The hearings were mostly IRS officials testifying about their *performance* in running the tax code, and it wasn’t pretty. J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration had this to say on page 4:

Our reviews of the effectiveness of IRS processes to identify and prevent erroneous claims for these energy-related credits and deductions . These erroneous claims could have been minimized if the IRS had taken the following actions which would also help minimize erroneous claims for other credits as well: [emphasis mine]

  • Establish effective processes to verify eligibility for these credits up front at the time tax returns are processed.
  • Design the tax forms used to claim the credits and deductions to request key information that can be used to verify eligibility.
  • Use the data the IRS already has to identify non-qualifying claims

To the IRS: if you can’t manage the tax deductions already in place for present vehicles eligible, how do you intend to manage the tax credits for this new *act* if it goes into force?

IER had this to say about the issue:

The Solyndra loan program and the NAT GAS Act are both based on the idea that private investors are not making good enough decisions, and therefore the federal government needs to speed things up—either through direct subsidies or through tax subsidies. The proponents of these programs argue that subsidizing solar panels or natural gas truck, bus, and car conversions will stimulate the economy and create jobs. Sadly, the NAT GAS Act will create the same incentives that gave us Solyndra’s demise.

David W. Kreutzer, Ph.D.,Research Fellow in Energy Economics and Climate Change at The Heritage Foundation testified before Congress on August 3 of this year. Here is a salient remark from that testimony, bottom of page 2:

Just this past week the Oversight Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means Committee held hearings regarding paid tax preparers. In opening statements it was noted that a Government Accountability Office study found nearly all returns completed by paid preparers contained errors. The errors in one category were estimated to cost the federal government over $100 billion [emphasis mine.] This finding is an indictment of the complexity of the tax code as much as it is an indictment of paid preparers.

In any event, the NAT GAS Act adds to the complexity with amendments to the current (already too complex) tax code. The amendments this act superimposes on the existing tax code will only make the job of those paid tax preparers even more difficult and prone to error.

Again, the purpose of the complexity is to narrowly tailor benefits to select recipients. This is the hallmark of a subsidy.

While some would argue subsidizing natural gas vehicles would create greater national security and make us less dependent on “countries who don’t like us very much” Kreutzer on page 6 says it’s “a poor anti-terror plan.” His conclusion:

With narrowly targeted amendments to the tax code, the NAT GAS Act creates subsidies for selected technologies. These subsidies promise preferential benefits for special interests, greater burdens on the federal budget, and less economic output. The NAT GAS Act would not significantly cut funding for hostile foreign regimes.

The major surprise to this writer is that so many Republicans are on board as sponsors of this act.

We can’t let *history repeat itself* and have another Solyndragate, especially one perpetrated by our Congressional representatives. Call your Congress Critter and tell them to vote “NO!”

Crossposted at Unified Patriots

Share
Filed Under Uncategorized Tagged With David W. Kreutzer, energy-related tax credits, H.R. 1380, Heritage, House Ways and Means Committee, IER, Institute for Energy Research, IRS, J. Russell George, NAT GAS Act, New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act, Rep. John Sullivan, Solyndra, tax code, vehicle subsidies

Elizabeth Warren’s *must see* socialist quote

September 22, 2011 By Carol Greenberg

Yep. Elizabeth Warren has made it official. She is running against Scott Brown for US Senate in Massachusetts.

When Brown was elected in 2010, we had high hopes he would be our savior from Obamacare and some have been disappointed. But there is always the alternative. Take a look at this vid from a couple days ago from Elizabeth Warren who helped create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau:

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there, good for you.

But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You don’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory…

Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea…God bless! Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.”

Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.

Share
Filed Under Uncategorized Tagged With Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Elizabeth Warren, Scott Brown