Regulatory Revisionism

Obama Says He Wants to Reduce Barriers to Job Creation, But He Won’t Dismantle the Barriers He Created

President Obama is meeting with small business owners today and is claiming that he came to Cleveland to “listen” to their ideas about job creation:

“President Obama tells his audience at Cleveland State University that he wants to do things a little differently today.

“‘I did not come to Cleveland to talk,’ he says. ‘Instead, I came here to listen.’

“He repeats that he wants the United States to compete ‘aggressively’ so it ‘wins the future.’” (Politico’s “Politico 44 Whiteboard,” 2/22/2011)

However, America’s employers have already spoken, and Obama has already refused to listen to them.

House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) solicited input from businesses on how regulations were affecting their day-to-day operations. He received nearly 2,000 pages of letters detailing how Obama’s regulatory agenda has raised business costs, reduced our global competitiveness and hurt job creation:

Issa Makes 1,947 Pages of Business Complaints About Obama Regulations Public. (“Issa Makes Submissions Reflecting Input from Job Creators on Regulatory Barriers to Job Creation Public,” Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 2/7/2011)

“EPA rules were cited more than those from any other agency in more than 100 letters sent by trade associations, businesses and some conservative groups to House oversight committee chairman Darrell Issa (R., Calif.) in response to his call for businesses to identify regulations they deemed burdensome, according to documents reviewed by the Wall Street Journal…

“Groups complained about dozens of other proposed and existing EPA regulations in letters viewed by the Journal, including the agency’s plans to tighten limits on emissions of some pollutants from industrial boilers, ground-level ozone, mountain-top mining, cooling water intake structures, the level of nutrients in Florida waters, and pollutants in the Chesapeake Bay.” (Louise Radnofsky, “Business Groups’ Target: EPA,” The Wall Street Journal, 2/7/2011)

Several businesses specifically singled out Obama administration actions as a source of concern:  

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESSES:

“Regulation affects small businesses in a substantially different way than it does large businesses…. For the small business owner, there is no regulatory compliance officer. This burden falls squarely on the owner, who, more times than not, is responsible for everything from ordering inventory and hiring employees, to taking out the trash at the end of the day…The compliance burdens presented by these rules are great because small business owners will need to spend significant time to understand these rules, make expenditures to expensive consultants to bring the facility up to compliance, and greatly increase the amount of time he or she spends on paperwork compliance.” (National Federation of Independent Businesses, Letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, Accessed 2/7/2010)

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS:

“The NAM’s overriding concern with the proposal [for EPA ground-level ozone regulations] is that the high compliance costs associated with the more stringent ozone standard will hinder manufacturers’ ability to add jobs and hurt our global competitiveness. One study estimated 60 ppb would result in the loss of 7.3 million jobs by 2020 and add $1.1 trillion in new regulatory costs per year between 2020 and 2030.” (Jay Timmons, National Association of Manufacturers, Letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, 1/7/2011)

ASSOCIATION OF ELECTRICAL AND MEDICAL IMAGING EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS:

“Of primary concern is the sheer volume of regulatory initiatives that may affect a particular industry or product sector and the lack of coordination in and among various federal agencies to mitigate the cumulative effect such regulations have on manufacturers…. The rate at which new regulations are developed and become effective causes numerous burdens for businesses, which often find themselves scrambling to understand the regulations, plan for compliance, educate their workforce, and meet complicated recordkeeping and reporting requirements.”(Kyle Pitsor, Association of Electrical and Medical Imaging Equipment Manufacturers, Letter to House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, 1/19/2011)

When given the chance to change direction and admit that his administration’s big government regulation binge has destroyed jobs, Obama instead offered a “stout defense” of regulations, pledging only that he would remove oppressive regulations “if” any exist at all:

“But to a polite, subdued audience he offered a stout defense of government regulations, even as he promised to eliminate those that are too burdensome. He reached back to history, invoking President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s outreach to corporate leaders and evoking the strains of self-sacrifice expressed by President John Kennedy.” (Jim Kuhnhenn, “Obama Says White House, CEOs Must Work Together,”Associated Press, 2/07/2011)

“I’ve ordered a government-wide review, and if there are rules on the books that are needlessly stifling job creation and economic growth, we will fix them.”(“Obama’s Remarks at the Chamber of Commerce,” The New York Times, 2/7/2011)

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: “Mr. Josten dismissed Mr. Obama’s recently announced regulatory strategy, ostensibly intended to reduce unnecessary burdens on business. ‘It’s a rehash of Clinton’s, which was a rehash of Carter’s,’Mr. Josten said.” (John Harwood, “Obama and U.S. Business Sheath Weapons for Now,” The New York Times, 2/6/2011)