Alan Krueger’s Nightmare for Main Street

As Obama Prepares “New Plan” to Create Jobs, His Pick for Top Economist Has Same Old Ideas on How to Destroy Them

• President Obama on Monday announced Princeton professor Alan B. Krueger as his pick to be the top White House economist, stating that he has “nothing but confidence” in his new appointee.
• Unfortunately for Americans struggling under a weak economy, Krueger is very much a supporter of the tax-hiking, job-destroying Obama policies that have made a bad economy worse. Krueger is on the record endorsing both cap-and-trade and calling for a new $500 billion tax.
• Krueger’s appointment is just the latest sign that Obama and Democrats don’t understand that their policies destroy jobs. Similar to Krueger’s support for a job-destroying cap-and-trade scheme, Obama and Democrats are letting the EPA push full speed ahead with job-destroying regulations that stand to imperil up to 8% of U.S. power generation and the associated jobs.

BACKGROUND 

President Obama on Monday announced Princeton professor Alan B. Krueger as his pick to be the top White House economist, stating that he has “nothing but confidence” in his new appointee: 

OBAMA: “NOTHING BUT CONFIDENCE” IN NOMINEE FOR TOP WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIST: “As President Obama prepares his jobs plan speech, he’s also filling out his economics team, nominating Princeton University’s Alan Krueger to be chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

“‘I have nothing but confidence in Alan as he takes on this important role,’ Obama said in the Rose Garden Monday, describing him as one of the nation’s leading economists.” (“Obama Nominates Princeton Professor as Head of Economic Advisors Team,”FoxNews.com, 8/29/2011)

Unfortunately for Americans struggling under a weak economy, Krueger is very much a supporter of the tax-hiking, job-destroying Obama policies that have made a bad economy worse. Krueger is on the record endorsing both cap-and-trade and calling for a new $500 billion tax: 

KRUEGER’S GREATEST HITS: “WHY NOT PASS A 5 PERCENT… NATIONAL SALES TAX”? “Why not pass a 5 percent consumption tax to take effect two years from now? There are many different ways to implement a consumption tax, but for simplicity think about a national sales tax.” (Alan B. Krueger, “A Future Consumption Tax to Fix Today’s Economy,” The New York Times, 1/12/2009)

TAX WOULD COST FAMILIES “APPROXIMATELY $500 BILLION A YEAR”: “In the long run, a 5 percent consumption tax would raise approximately $500 billion a year, and fill a considerable hole in the budget outlook.” (Alan B. Krueger, “A Future Consumption Tax to Fix Today’s Economy,” The New York Times, 1/12/2009)

“THE MAIN DOWNSIDE…IS THAT TAXES REDUCE ECONOMIC ACTIVITY. BUT THE GOVERNMENT MUST MAKE CRITICAL TRADE-OFFS”: “The main downside of this proposal is that taxes reduce economic activity. But the government must make critical trade-offs, and a consumption tax could be the most efficient means to raise revenue to finance essential government functions.” (Alan B. Krueger, “A Future Consumption Tax to Fix Today’s Economy,” The New York Times, 1/12/2009)

JOB-DESTROYING CAP-AND-TRADE “WOULD BE ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANCE AND SUBSTANTIAL PIECES OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION IN OUR NATION’S HISTORY”: “As you know, one of the President’s top priorities is to develop a comprehensive energy and climate change plan to invest in clean energy, address the global climate crisis, and create new jobs. In turn, we believe that a greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program should play a central role in our effort to achieve these goals at the lowest possible cost. We are very appreciative of the work being done in both Houses of Congress to this end, and look forward to working together to craft successful legislation. An economy-wide GHG cap-and-trade program would be one of the most important and substantial pieces of environmental legislation in our nation’s history.” (Alan Krueger, Committee On Finance, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 5/7/2009) 

KRUEGER BACKED “DRAMATIC STEPS” TOWARDS A CAP-AND-TRADE. “The Administration believes that it is no longer sufficient to address our nation’s energy needs by finding more fossil fuels, and instead we must take dramatic steps towards becoming a clean energy economy. These include encouraging the use of, and investment in, clean energy infrastructure and energy efficient technologies. … In addition to direct investments in clean energy, the Administration’s Budget proposed a cap-and-trade program that would provide incentives for firms to reduce GHG emissions and to invest in new, cleaner lines of business.” (Alan Krueger, “Statement On Energy, Natural Resources, And Infrastructure,”Treasury Department, 9/10/2009) 

NO WONDER EVEN FELLOW DEMOCRATS ARE CALLING THE PRESIDENT’S PICK “OUT-OF-TOUCH”: “Democratic Rep. Dan Boren on Monday said President Obama’s appointment of Princeton University economist Alan Krueger as one of his top economic advisers sends a signal that the president is out of touch with independent voters. …

“Boren argued that the Obama administration is insufficiently business-friendly.

“Obama doesn’t have to do everything the business community wants, Boren said. But he argued that—with the exception of former investment banker and now White House Chief of Staff William Daley—many of Obama’s appointments have lacked experience in the private sector. The swing voters who decide elections are looking for a signal that the president is serious about getting the economy back on track, Boren said.

“ ‘I think what’s on most independents’ minds is: Is the president willing to work with the business community?’ he said.” (Alex Roarty, “Democratic Congressman Calls Obama’s Economic Advisers Pick Out of Touch,” National Journal, 8/29/2011) 

Much like Krueger, Vice President Joe Biden similarly signaled the White House’s plan to double down on more of the same failed policies when he voiced support for more stimulus spending last week:

KRUEGER: “TURNAROUND IN JOB GROWTH” IS “IN LARGE PART DUE TO” STIMULUS: “Well, the way the stimulus was designed was to break the fall in the economy. And I think we’re seeing that that’s occurring. … We’re seeing a turnaround in job growth. And that’s all the — that’s in large part due to the recovery act.” (Remarks from Alan Krueger, Press Conference, 7/2/2010) 

BIDEN: WE NEED MORE STIMULUS, FIRST ONE DIDN’T SPEND ENOUGH MONEY. “Vice President Joe Biden said on Friday the U.S. economy needed more stimulus to get it moving, putting in a plug for government intervention shortly before the White House unveils new proposals to boost job growth. … ‘I think the economy does need more stimulus,’ Biden said, adding that it was difficult to get the 2009 package of some $830 billion in spending and tax cuts through Congress even when Democrats had majorities in the House of Representatives and the Senate. ‘Everybody says we should’ve (had)…a bigger stimulus package. Yeah, we should’ve. I was pushing (for) it,’ he said.” (Jeff Mason, “Biden Says U.S. Needs More Stimulus, Businesses Mad at S&P,” Reuters, 8/26/2011)

OBAMA’S “NEW PLAN” FOR THE ECONOMY IS THE SAME AS THE OLD PLAN: MORE FAILED STIMULUS SPENDING: “President Obama has decided to press Congress for a new round of stimulus spending…” (Zachary A. Goldfarb and Peter Wallsten, “Obama to Issue New Proposals on Job Creation, Deficit Reduction,” The Washington Post, 8/17/2011) 

Krueger’s appointment is just the latest sign that Obama and Democrats don’t understand that their policies destroy jobs. Similar to Krueger’s support for a job-destroying cap-and-trade scheme, Obama and Democrats are letting the EPA push forward with new job-destroying regulations—“among the most expensive in the agency’s history”—that stand to imperil up to 8% of U.S. power generation and the associated jobs. When will Democrats own up to their job-destroying policies?:

OBAMA CAN STOP THE EPA’S JOB-DESTROYING REGULATORY RAMPAGE… IF HE WANTS TO: “The EPA is currently pushing an unprecedented rewrite of air-pollution rules in an attempt to shut down a large portion of the coal-fired power fleet. Though these regulations are among the most expensive in the agency’s history, none were demanded by the late Pelosi Congress. They’re all the result of purely bureaucratic discretion under the Clean Air Act, last revised in 1990.

“As it happens, those 1990 amendments contain an overlooked proviso that would let Mr. Obama overrule EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s agenda. With an executive order, he could exempt all power plants “from compliance with any standard or limitation” for two years, or even longer using rolling two-year periods. All he has to declare is “that the technology to implement such standard is not available and that it is in the national security interests of the United States to do so.”

“Both criteria are easily met.” (Editorial, “An EPA Moratorium,” The Wall Street Journal, 8/29/2011)