Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark

[Lovebears65]

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark

During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans. This is almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years. Hundreds more regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation. Congress must increase scrutiny of regulations—existing and new. Reforms should include requiring congressional approval of major rules and mandatory sunset clauses for major regulations.

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations

 

[naturegirl]

Heck I'd just like them to enforce the existing immigration laws instead of spending tax payer money fighting states that are trying to do their job because they won't.

I'm thinking regulation is not going to be less, if we have 4 more years of this administration we won't be able to poop without permission...........well, unless you're a member of Occupy something or another.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Holy shit.

I read through much of that propaganda.

How about doing me a favor. Provide one concrete example of a regulation that has ACTUALLY hampered an industry since it was put in place. Prove that it is the regulation in question that caused the "hampering". Don't tell me what the ******* Chamber of Commerce predicts will happen. Tell me what has ACTUALLY happened. Then, if you can do this.......try a little intellectual honesty and play the devil's advocate. Tell me why the regulation in question might be necessary anyway.

Thanks.

 

[Full-Auto]

Holy shit.

I read through much of that propaganda.

How about doing me a favor. Provide one concrete example of a regulation that has ACTUALLY hampered an industry since it was put in place. Prove that it is the regulation in question that caused the "hampering". Don't tell me what the ******* Chamber of Commerce predicts will happen. Tell me what has ACTUALLY happened. Then, if you can do this.......try a little intellectual honesty and play the devil's advocate. Tell me why the regulation in question might be necessary anyway.

Thanks.

You should have read the entire piece, it tells you specifically the dept and where to look.

It was a nice attempt at deflection, Do you do a jig that goes with the inherent need?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Holy shit.

I read through much of that propaganda.

How about doing me a favor. Provide one concrete example of a regulation that has ACTUALLY hampered an industry since it was put in place. Prove that it is the regulation in question that caused the "hampering". Don't tell me what the ******* Chamber of Commerce predicts will happen. Tell me what has ACTUALLY happened. Then, if you can do this.......try a little intellectual honesty and play the devil's advocate. Tell me why the regulation in question might be necessary anyway.

Thanks.

You should have read the entire piece, it tells you specifically the dept and where to look.

It was a nice attempt at deflection, Do you do a jig that goes with the inherent need?

No. It does not provide the information that I asked for. It lists a bunch of regulations with some horseshit about how it WILL or MIGHT or IS EXPECTED TO effect business. But it does not provide any concrete examples of cases where this has actually happened.

I don't deflect, dummy. I addressed the OP with questions regarding the OP. You don't seem to know what deflection is. Odd for someone who does it so often.

You nutters......even the ones like you who wish to present themselves as independents....have been going on and on about the "business killing regulations" that Obama has instituted for ******* years now. When are you going to begin citing examples where federal regulations have been proven to have caused harm to businesses.

Proof. Please.

 

[code1211]

Holy shit.

I read through much of that propaganda.

How about doing me a favor. Provide one concrete example of a regulation that has ACTUALLY hampered an industry since it was put in place. Prove that it is the regulation in question that caused the "hampering". Don't tell me what the ******* Chamber of Commerce predicts will happen. Tell me what has ACTUALLY happened. Then, if you can do this.......try a little intellectual honesty and play the devil's advocate. Tell me why the regulation in question might be necessary anyway.

Thanks.

If you had read the article, you'd have your answer. If you would care to read it here, here's your sign:

Major Rules Increasing Private-Sector Burdens
January 1, 2011–January 20, 2012
(All figures in constant 2010 dollars)
January 19, 2011: Employment and Training Administration, Department of Labor, “Wage Methodology for the Temporary Non-agricultural Employment H-2B Program.” Increased minimum-wage rates for foreign workers employed under the H-2B visa program. The final rule was strongly opposed by employers. In a letter to the Department of Labor, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote: “There is nothing in the content of the Final Rule that in any way assists…employers to expand their business and increase hiring. In fact, the effect of the Final Rule is exactly the opposite and will dramatically drive up costs for…employers, in many cases by more than 50%, which will end up destroying jobs for U.S. workers.”[28]

Annual Cost: $847.4 million
January 19, 2011: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, “Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, Ejection Mitigation.” Required modification of air bags and window design to reduce the possibility of vehicle occupants being ejected in a crash. New standards will increase the average sticker price of cars and light trucks by $53 to $200.

Annual Cost: $511.8 million
January 25, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Issuer Review of Assets in Offerings of Asset-Backed Securities.” Implemented a provision of Dodd–Frank requiring issuers who register the offer and sale of an asset-backed security (ABS) to review the assets underlying the ABS. Critics argued that the new rule will “only cause the market to seize up further, rather than get credit flowing again as intended.”[29]

(Note: The SEC’s cost figure only represents the cost of “outside” professional help, and not the estimated 286,016 additional work hours necessary to comply, or three-quarters of the total “internal” work required).
Annual Cost: $8.4 million
January 26, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Disclosure for Asset-Backed Securities Required by Section 943 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.” Required securitizers of asset-backed securities to disclose fulfilled and unfulfilled repurchase requests. Adopted concurrently with the asset-backed security rule above.
Annual Cost: $2.2 million
Initial Cost: $23 million
February 2, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Shareholder Approval of Executive Compensation and Golden Parachute Compensation.” Implemented section 951 of Dodd–Frank requiring companies to conduct a separate shareholder advisory vote to approve executive compensation. Many predict that such requirements will make it more difficult for U.S. companies to recruit and retain executives.
Annual Cost: $7.8 million
March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units.” Established new standards of performance and emission limits for solid waste incinerators. A petition to stay the rule by a number of industry associations noted “substantial uncertainty as to the applicability of the final rules”; “key elements…not supported by the underlying data”; and “several of the emissions standards are so stringent that companies predict that no viable means of complying with them will be devised.”[30]
Annual Cost: $286.2 million
Initial Cost: $721.7 million
March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters.” Established new emissions standards for hundreds of thousands of commercial, institutional, and industrial boilers. The Council of Industrial Boiler Owners pegged the total cost of the regulation at $14.5 billion. The U.S. Small Business Administration warned that the rules would cause “significant new regulatory costs” for businesses, institutions, and municipalities across the country. A Commerce Department analysis reportedly concluded that the rules as originally configured would cause job losses of 40,000 to 60,000—much greater than the EPA had claimed.[31]
Annual Cost: $1.8 billion
Initial Cost: $5.2 billion
March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers.” Same as above, but for smaller facilities.
Annual Cost: $546.9 million
March 25, 2011: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), “Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disability Act, As Amended.” Expanded the definition of the term ‘‘disability,” and delineated the extra accommodations that employers must provide to disabled employees and customers. Critics note that the commission, for the first time, listed specific medical conditions that will “virtually always” count as covered impairments, thereby unilaterally categorizing tens of millions of Americans as disabled. Moreover, the new regulation treats any impairment—no matter how brief in duration—as a covered disability. Employment attorneys say the changes will burden employers with compliance challenges as well as with litigation that will inevitably follow the EEOC’s expansive approach.[32]
Annual Cost: $121.5 million
April 21, 2011: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, “Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Clothes Dryers and Room Air Conditioners.” Increased energy conservation standards for residential clothes dryers and room air conditioners. Will raise the cost of home appliances.
Annual Cost: $161.8 million
April 25, 2011: Federal Reserve Board, “Truth in Lending.” Instituted a higher APR threshold for determining whether “jumbo” mortgage loans secured by a first lien on a consumer’s principal dwelling are higher-priced mortgage loans for which an escrow account must be established. According to the Small Business Administration’s Office of Advocacy, “These burdensome changes may lead to small entities leaving the mortgage industry which could have a negative impact on the availability of mortgages, competition and the consumer.”[33]
Annual Cost: No estimate provided by the Federal Reserve Board.
June 3, 2011: Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury, “Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service.” Required IRS certification of tax preparers.
Annual Cost: $47.5 million
June 22, 2011: Department of Health and Human Services, “Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements.” Required stark illustrations of smoking risks to be displayed on cigarette packages and in cigarette advertisements. However, Judge Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in February that the mandate violates the First Amendment, finding that the required images constitute direct advocacy to not buy the product rather than warnings that inform consumers about the effects of smoking.[34]
Annual Cost: None
Initial Cost: $342.7 million
June 27, 2011: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy, “Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Furnaces and Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat Pumps.” Set more stringent efficiency standards for home heating and cooling appliances. The regulation is expected to drive up the price of heating and air conditioning equipment. Although the Energy Department claims that these costs will be offset by lower utility bills, others disagree. According to the Air Conditioning Contractors Association, “DOE has created a new regulatory scheme that is ripe for abuse without fully considering the costs of compliance or the exposure to problems.”[35]
Annual Cost: $657.5 million
June 30, 2011: Department of Housing and Urban Development, “SAFE Mortgage Licensing Act: Minimum Licensing Standards and Oversight Responsibilities.” Set minimum standards for state licensing and registration of residential mortgage loan originators and requirements for operating the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry.
Annual Cost: $377.1 million (Cost estimate assumes no state regulation; the incremental cost will be lower for companies operating under state regulation. The full amount is counted here because the regulation establishes a cost floor).
July 8, 2011: Department of Health and Human Services, “Administrative Simplification: Adoption of Operating Rules for Eligibility for a Health Plan and Health Care Claim Status Transactions.” As required by Obamacare, established operating standards for the health care industry to facilitate electronic transactions.
Annual Cost: $547.5 million
July 19, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Rules Implementing Amendments to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.” As called for under Dodd–Frank, expanded the registration threshold for investment advisers, required advisers to hedge funds, and increased reporting requirements for investment advisers.
Annual Cost: $0.9 million
Initial Cost: $49.1 million
July 20, 2011: Federal Reserve Board, “Debit Card Interchange Fees and Routing.” Imposed price controls on the fees banks may charge to process debit-card transactions, as authorized under Dodd–Frank. Banking industry claims that losses of $6.6 billion annually will force cancellation of rewards programs, higher fees on checking accounts, and annual fees for credit cards.[36]
Annual Cost: No estimate provided by the Federal Reserve Board.
August 3, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Large Trader Reporting.” Required large traders to register with the SEC, and to comply with new reporting and record-keeping requirements. Aimed at preventing “flash crashes” of the stock markets, such as that occurring in May 2010. There was “significant opposition” to this rule, based on the cost and the effect on foreign competition.[37]
Annual Cost: $18 million
Initial Cost: $37 million
August 8, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals.” Mandated 27 eastern, midwestern, and southern states to achieve more stringent emissions reductions from power plants. The rule has been challenged by Texas as threatening the reliability of the electrical supply.
Annual Cost: $846.3 million
August 30, 2011: National Labor Relations Board, “Notification of Employee Rights Under the National Labor Relations Act [NLRA].” Required employers to post notices informing employees of their rights under the NLRA, and established the size, form, and content of the notice. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a lawsuit alleging that the regulation violates federal labor and regulatory laws, as well as the First Amendment.[38]
Annual Cost: No estimate provided by the NLRB.
Initial Cost: $378.4 million
September 1, 2011: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Swap Data Repositories: Registration Standards, Duties and Core Principles.” Established registration requirements and other obligations for registered swap data repositories, as called for under Dodd–Frank.
Annual Cost: $60.8 million (This figure reflects only partial costs. Commission officials say they are unable to estimate the cost accurately “given existing technologies, the current state of the swaps market and the potential growth in the future.”)
Initial Cost: $118 million
September 15, 2011: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Transportation, “Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles.” Set fuel-efficiency and emissions standards for combination tractors, heavy-duty pickups and vans, and vocational vehicles. The regulation is expected to drive up prices for trucks by as much as $6,000, with the added burden falling heavily on small, independent owner-operators.[39]
Annual Cost: $606.9 million
September 15, 2011: Department of Energy, “Energy Conservation Program: Energy Conservation Standards for Residential Refrigerators, Refrigerator-Freezers, and Freezers.” Set more stringent energy-efficiency standards for appliances. The Department of Energy claims that the greater efficiency will save consumers money. But critics say the added costs may dissuade consumers from purchasing new appliances, and that it is not the proper role of government to dictate supposed energy savings for consumers that consumers do not bother to capture themselves.[40]
Annual Cost: $1.4 billion
November 8, 2011: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Derivatives Clearing Organization General Provisions and Core Principles.” Among other things, established regulatory standards for financial resources; participant and product eligibility; risk management; settlement procedures; treatment of funds; default rules and procedures; rule enforcement; system safeguards; reporting; recordkeeping; public information; information sharing; antitrust considerations; and legal risk.
Annual Cost: $5.7 million (This figure reflects only reporting costs. No other cost estimate provided by the commission.)
November 8, 2011: Consumer Product Safety Commission, “Testing and Labeling Pertaining to Product Certification.” Established standards for certification, testing, and labeling of children’s products.
Annual Cost: $192.9 million (This figure refers only to “record-keeping.” The actual testing costs are estimated as $4.7 million per year for each large manufacturer; $467,015 per year for each small manufacturer; and $6,222 per year for a small-batch manufacturer.)
November 14, 2011: Department of Energy, “Energy Conservation Standards for Fluorescent Lamp Ballasts.” Established energy-efficiency standards and testing and labeling requirements for fluorescent lamp ballasts. As with other energy conservation standards, critics contend that the touted energy savings are overly optimistic and that it is not the proper role of government to dictate energy savings for consumers.
Annual Cost: $363 million
November 16, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Reporting by Investment Advisers to Private Funds and Certain Commodity Pool Operators and Commodity Trading Advisors on Form PF.” Required investment advisers registered with the SEC that advise one or more funds and have at least $150 million in private-fund assets under management to comply with filing and record-keeping requirements.
Annual Cost: $59.3 million
Initial Cost: $58.8 million
November 18, 2011: Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), “Position Limits for Futures and Swaps.” Under Dodd–Frank, established federal position limits and limit formulas for 28 physical commodity futures and option contracts and physical commodity swaps that are economically equivalent to such contracts. This regulation was intended to stop excessive speculation in futures markets, but critics question whether speculation is a problem. According to Democratic CFTC member Michael Dunn, the regulation “may actually make it more difficult for farmers, producers and manufacturers to hedge the risks they take in order to provide the public with milk, bread and gas.”[41]
Annual Cost: $96.4 million
Initial Cost: $4.1 million
December 19, 2011: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Investment of Customer Funds and Funds Held in an Account for Foreign Futures and Foreign Options Transactions.” Amended CFTC regulations on investment of customer-segregated funds and others related to permitted investments, liquidity requirements, removal of rating requirements, and expansion of concentration limits.
Annual Cost: No estimate provided by the CFTC.
December 27, 2011: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Department of Transportation, “Hours of Service of Drivers.” Revised the hours of service regulations to limit the use of the 34-hour restart provision to once every 168 hours, and required that anyone using the 34-hour restart provision have as part of the restart two periods that include 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. The American Trucking Associations has filed suit in federal court to overturn the rule, arguing that even [the DOT’s] “own analyses show that even when they overstate the safety benefits of these changes, the costs created by their rule still outweigh those benefits.”[42]
Annual Cost: $470 million
December 29, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Net Worth Standard for Accredited Investors.” As required by Dodd–Frank, amended the accredited investor standards to define “accredited investor” to exclude the value of a person’s primary residence on the basis of having a net worth in excess of $1 million. Other technical amendments.
Annual Cost: No estimate provided by the SEC.
January 9, 2012: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Real-Time Public Reporting of Swap Transaction Data.” As required by Dodd–Frank, established standards and requirements for real-time reporting and public availability of swap transaction and pricing data.
Annual Cost: No figures provided by the CFTC
January 10, 2012: Office of the Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services, “Administrative Simplification: Adoption of Standards for Health Care Electronic Funds Transfers and Remittance Advice.” As required by President Obama’s health care legislation, established adoption of standards for electronic funds transfers.
Annual Cost: $33 million
January 13, 2012: Commodity Futures Trading Commission, “Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements.” As called for under Dodd–Frank, the rule instituted recordkeeping and reporting requirements for swap data repositories, derivatives-clearing organizations, designated contract markets, swap execution facilities, swap dealers, major swap participants, and swap counterparties who are neither swap dealers nor major swap participants.
Annual Cost: $1.1 billion
Initial Cost: $2.5 billion
Major Rules Decreasing Regulatory Burdens on the Private Sector
January 1, 2011–January 20, 2012
(All figures in constant 2010 dollars)
April 18, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Oil Pollution Prevention; Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule—Amendments for Milk and Milk Product Containers.” Exempted all milk and milk product containers and associated piping and appurtenances from spill prevention and control requirements.
Annual Savings: $147.68 million
June 29, 2011: Securities and Exchange Commission, “Family Offices.” Under Dodd–Frank, excluded family offices from definition of investment advisers and redefined family offices for the purposes of that exclusion.
Annual Savings: No figures provided by the SEC.
July 20, 2011: Federal Reserve Board, “Debit Card Interchange Fees and Routing.” Allowed a debit-card issuer to receive an adjustment of 1 cent to its interchange transaction fee if the issuer develops, implements, and updates policies and procedures to identify and prevent fraudulent electronic debit transactions. Adopted concurrently with underlying price control rules on interchange fees.
Annual Savings: No figures provided by the Federal Reserve Board.
August 18, 2011: Department of Homeland Security, “Air Cargo Screening.” Removed third-party validations of cargo screening programs in favor of TSA conducting all assessments for cargo-screening certification.
Annual Savings: $68.65 million
October 25, 2011: Department of Labor, “Investment Advice—Participants and Beneficiaries.” Largely confirmed exemption to limits on the provision of investment advice to participants and beneficiaries in individual accounts, such as 401(k) plans.
Annual Savings: None

 

[starcraftzzz]

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark

During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans. This is almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years. Hundreds more regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation. Congress must increase scrutiny of regulations—existing and new. Reforms should include requiring congressional approval of major rules and mandatory sunset clauses for major regulations.

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations

And when we add the benefits of Obamas new regulations those regulations save far more then they cost. For example:
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly

 

[bripat9643]

And when we add the benefits of Obamas new regulations those regulations save far more then they cost. For example:
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly

That's utter horseshit. The EPA's numbers are a complete fiction.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Way to go code. You did a great job of repeating the OP AND Full Auto's posts. But you failed miserably at actually answering my question.

Pick one of those listed regulations.........any one. And give me the actual details regarding how the regulation has ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO HAMPER THE INDUSTRY IN QUESTION.

I'll guess that you won't select the second one listed....or any other one that "hampers" the automobile industry.

Please........try harder.

 

[Greenbeard]

July 8, 2011: Department of Health and Human Services, “Administrative Simplification: Adoption of Operating Rules for Eligibility for a Health Plan and Health Care Claim Status Transactions.” As required by Obamacare, established operating standards for the health care industry to facilitate electronic transactions.
Annual Cost: $547.5 million

Looking just at this one, it seems pretty obvious what's happening here. All policies have costs and benefits/savings. The analysis for this one projects savings from administrative simplification that are 3-5 times the projected costs of actually implementing the changes. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you've probably neglected to include the benefits associated with the rest of the policy changes in your list, as well.

All investment sounds bad if you forget (or purposely choose not) to mention the return on investment.

 

[starcraftzzz]

And when we add the benefits of Obamas new regulations those regulations save far more then they cost. For example:
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly

That's utter horseshit. The EPA's numbers are a complete fiction.

First off the numbers aren't from the EPA
Second Yes I do realize that to Republicans reality is bullshit

 

[LoneLaugher]

America is a great nation. We have enough brilliant and well intentioned people......in general and in positions of leadership......to defeat the forces of stupid and help make this world a better place to live.

 

[code1211]

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark

During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans. This is almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years. Hundreds more regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation. Congress must increase scrutiny of regulations—existing and new. Reforms should include requiring congressional approval of major rules and mandatory sunset clauses for major regulations.

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations

And when we add the benefits of Obamas new regulations those regulations save far more then they cost. For example:
Evidence Mounts to Back EPA Mercury Rules, With Annual Benefits of $50 to $130 billion | ThinkProgress
^EPA mercury reducing regulations save 50-130billion yearly

How do you square this with the Mercury content of CF swirly lights?

 

[code1211]

Way to go code. You did a great job of repeating the OP AND Full Auto's posts. But you failed miserably at actually answering my question.

Pick one of those listed regulations.........any one. And give me the actual details regarding how the regulation has ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO HAMPER THE INDUSTRY IN QUESTION.

I'll guess that you won't select the second one listed....or any other one that "hampers" the automobile industry.

Please........try harder.

The first one that was not an SEC related one:

March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units.” Established new standards of performance and emission limits for solid waste incinerators. A petition to stay the rule by a number of industry associations noted “substantial uncertainty as to the applicability of the final rules”; “key elements…not supported by the underlying data”; and “several of the emissions standards are so stringent that companies predict that no viable means of complying with them will be devised.”[30]
Annual Cost: $286.2 million
Initial Cost: $721.7 million

 

[code1211]

July 8, 2011: Department of Health and Human Services, “Administrative Simplification: Adoption of Operating Rules for Eligibility for a Health Plan and Health Care Claim Status Transactions.” As required by Obamacare, established operating standards for the health care industry to facilitate electronic transactions.
Annual Cost: $547.5 million

Looking just at this one, it seems pretty obvious what's happening here. All policies have costs and benefits/savings. The analysis for this one projects savings from administrative simplification that are 3-5 times the projected costs of actually implementing the changes. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that you've probably neglected to include the benefits associated with the rest of the policy changes in your list, as well.

All investment sounds bad if you forget (or purposely choose not) to mention the return on investment.

That would be a good bet if we were talking about a private for profit concern, but aren't we talking about a government run (and therefore a boondoggle) concern?

The computer revolution has reduced the number of people required to accomplish any task from garbage collection to executive activities except one and that is government.

The number of government employees which are almost exclusively administrative should have reduced by about 50% but instead has grown by about 10%.

This is for work that was already being done.

For a completely new set of duties, we may all cower under the weight of the burgeoning bureaucracies about to emerge.

Federal Workforce Trend, 2000-2010 | Intellectual Takeout (ITO)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Way to go code. You did a great job of repeating the OP AND Full Auto's posts. But you failed miserably at actually answering my question.

Pick one of those listed regulations.........any one. And give me the actual details regarding how the regulation has ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO HAMPER THE INDUSTRY IN QUESTION.

I'll guess that you won't select the second one listed....or any other one that "hampers" the automobile industry.

Please........try harder.

The first one that was not an SEC related one:

March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units.” Established new standards of performance and emission limits for solid waste incinerators. A petition to stay the rule by a number of industry associations noted “substantial uncertainty as to the applicability of the final rules”; “key elements…not supported by the underlying data”; and “several of the emissions standards are so stringent that companies predict that no viable means of complying with them will be devised.”[30]
Annual Cost: $286.2 million
Initial Cost: $721.7 million

One more time............where are the actual details regarding how this regulation has hampered the industry? Really....you have not even attempted to support your claim.

You are so bad at this, that it isn't even much fun to make fun of you.

 

[code1211]

America is a great nation. We have enough brilliant and well intentioned people......in general and in positions of leadership......to defeat the forces of stupid and help make this world a better place to live.

And when the money runs out, how much brilliance will the elite dispense to those starving and rioting in the streets?

We are currently collecting in tax about $1.00 for every $1.66 we are spending.

It will take allot of brilliance to make up for that kind of debt creation.

If our current leadership understood how to create wealth as well as they understand how to create debt, we'd be in pretty good shape.

They don't. We're screwed. November 6 can't get here quick enough.

 

[code1211]

Way to go code. You did a great job of repeating the OP AND Full Auto's posts. But you failed miserably at actually answering my question.

Pick one of those listed regulations.........any one. And give me the actual details regarding how the regulation has ALREADY BEEN PROVEN TO HAMPER THE INDUSTRY IN QUESTION.

I'll guess that you won't select the second one listed....or any other one that "hampers" the automobile industry.

Please........try harder.

The first one that was not an SEC related one:

March 21, 2011: Environmental Protection Agency, “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units.” Established new standards of performance and emission limits for solid waste incinerators. A petition to stay the rule by a number of industry associations noted “substantial uncertainty as to the applicability of the final rules”; “key elements…not supported by the underlying data”; and “several of the emissions standards are so stringent that companies predict that no viable means of complying with them will be devised.”[30]
Annual Cost: $286.2 million
Initial Cost: $721.7 million

One more time............where are the actual details regarding how this regulation has hampered the industry? Really....you have not even attempted to support your claim.

You are so bad at this, that it isn't even much fun to make fun of you.

Exactly what are you looking for besides adding cost, causing confusion, eliminating the possibility of compliance and removing the ability to adequately understand what is desired by the regulations?

Is there anything else that a government can do outside of simply shutting a company down as they have done with Gibson and Boeing?

You will need to define for me what you are looking for here.

 

[The T]

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulation at the Three-Year Mark

During the first three years of the Obama Administration, 106 new major federal regulations added more than $46 billion per year in new costs for Americans. This is almost four times the number—and more than five times the cost—of the major regulations issued by George W. Bush during his first three years. Hundreds more regulations are winding through the rulemaking pipeline as a consequence of the Dodd–Frank financial-regulation law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s global warming crusade, threatening to further weaken an anemic economy and job creation. Congress must increase scrutiny of regulations—existing and new. Reforms should include requiring congressional approval of major rules and mandatory sunset clauses for major regulations.

Red Tape Rising: Obama-Era Regulations

I'm all for taking the EPA down a few notches if not taking it out all-together.

 

[Polk]

Heck I'd just like them to enforce the existing immigration laws instead of spending tax payer money fighting states that are trying to do their job because they won't.

I'm thinking regulation is not going to be less, if we have 4 more years of this administration we won't be able to poop without permission...........well, unless you're a member of Occupy something or another.

This administration has been way more active on enforcing immigration laws than the last one was.

Obama’s Record-High Deportations Draw Hispanic Scorn - ABC News