Con: A return to prosperity is light-years away if we follow Obama’s road map
WASHINGTON EDITOR’S NOTE: The writer is addressing the question, As the nation celebrates Labor Day, are American workers better off?
On Labor Day, millions of Americans will consult their Rand McNally Road Atlas before hitting the highway. But those seeking the quickest route to Lost Jobs and Delayed Recovery need only to follow the Obama-Pelosi Policy Atlas.
The OPPA-preferred route starts in Protectionism, and tells you to take a hard left at Higher Taxes as you speed on to Higher Spending. Don’t miss that head-spinning left at Global Warming or the dizzying spiral of loopy lefts approaching Health Care.
Following this route, you’ll find yourself where we are this Labor Day—mired in high unemployment and rising taxes. Even the kids in the back seat are upset. After all, this trip’s been financed on their credit cards, and they’re not thrilled about being saddled with trillions of dollars in additional debt.
It’s no way to spend a holiday. And no way for our nation to get to Economic Recovery and Job Growth—the places we really need to go.
The OPPA route is nothing new. It follows the decades-old liberal agenda on trade, health care, global warming and mass unionization. That agenda has never brought prosperity to workers.
Consider trade protectionism. It’s been tried—and found wanting—since the Great Depression. Smoot and Hawley ginned up The Tariff Act of 1930 to get America back to work after the Stock Market Crash of ’29. Instead, it destroyed trade so effectively that by 1932, American exports to Europe were just a third of what they had been in 1929. World trade fell two-thirds as other nations retaliated. Jobs evaporated.
Unfortunately, Obama’s first big initiative—the stimulus bill—contained protectionist “Buy American” provisions that have already triggered retaliation from our biggest trading partner, Canada.
This was followed by protectionist legislation targeting Mexican trucking. Mexico is our third-largest trading partner. Our neighbor to the south promptly retaliated by slapping tariffs on 90 American exports. Way to grow the economy, team!
Meanwhile, employers are struggling to survive. They’re looking for ways to cut costs without cutting jobs. The OPPA response: Pile on. The president and Speaker Pelosi spent the summer trying to ram through health-care “reform” that would slap an additional 8 percent payroll tax on employers who can’t afford a government-approved health plan. It’s a prescription for pricing workers right out of jobs.
How about helping working families meet their household bills? Rising energy costs kill jobs and hit America’s poorest the hardest. Yet, OPPA is pushing “global warming” legislation that would require factories, power plants, refineries and other large energy consumers such as schools and hospitals to obtain federal permits to emit carbon. It would drain trillions of dollars out of the private economy and into federal coffers.
The only thing we can say about this legislation with any amount of certainty is that it would cost at least 2.5 million jobs to achieve, at most, a temperature drop of no more than two-tenths of a degree by the 22nd century.
The Obama administration is also working to eliminate traditional worker protections. It is pressing for a union-backed “card check” law that strips workers’ of their right to cast secret ballots in unionization elections. The act would force workers to publicly sign union cards in front of union organizers. Workers who tell organizers they don’t really want to unionize—or to pay those dues—would face pressure to “reconsider.”
The OPPA-recommended route presents awfully bleak vistas: higher taxes, massive deficits pressuring interest rates and inflation, more expensive mandates, punitive bureaucracies, impediments to commerce, forced unionization. All are job killers.
For Labor Day, or any other day, it offers no joy-ride for the American worker.
Elaine L. Chao, who served as secretary of labor in the Bush administration, is a distinguished fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Readers may write to her in care of The Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Ave. NE, Washington, D.C. 20002; Web site: www.heritage.org. Information about Heritage’s funding may be found at http://www.heritage.org/about/reports.cfm.


Sep 11, 2009 at 10:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
And in case you haven't figured it out, there are not enough "rich" people, I mean the truly rich, to make a big dent in the federal spending we are seeing under Mr. Obama. Remember when Clinton was president? They had "rich" defined down to, like $50,000/year. They were ready to "impute" income to middle class homeowners because they were living for "free" in the homes they OWNED. Huh?!? Exactly. Words really do mean things! Let's not allow our political (pseudo-) elite to define terms. Where is Orwell when we need him?
Sep 10, 2009 at 10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
AndrewJackson: It has been shown time and again that increasing taxes on the so-called rich (be careful here, you might be defined as rich yourself) is counter-productive to the economy. They are not stupid, they have accountants and attorneys and financial planners who will tell them how to change their behavior to minimize taxes. Higher marginal tax rates? Shift income into the future, don't realize capital gains, etc. Luxury taxes on yachts? Don't purchase a yacht this year. Btw, Congress actually tried this one year, throwing thousands of people in the boating industries out of their jobs as the "rich" simply stopped purchasing new boats. More taxes on small business? Hire fewer people and/or lay off some current employees. Rich or poor, people react to changes in the tax laws as is in their own best interest. Attempting to divide and conquer by encouraging class warfare is foolish, don't buy into it!
Sep 8, 2009 at 12:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
And another thing, taxing the rich more does not change their lifestyles one iota. They "might" have to move down to a 150' yacht. The low income person is going to increase his grocery purchases or other NEEDS with any money saved by not paying taxes.
Sep 8, 2009 at 12:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Anyone that believes that higher taxes on the rich slows down investment or economic cycles are not taking into account one simple human condition: GREED. If anything it will encourage the rich to do MORE with their money to make up for the money(value) that they perceive that they are losing. Anyone that thinks they have an arguement against this theory hasn't ever associated with rich people. I invite any of the 6-7 economics professors that I studied under to PROVE me wrong! No theories, proof!
Sep 7, 2009 at 8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
alliebaba: I believe you are incorrect.
Here are some links that seem to show that the top earners pay a disproportionate amount of the national tax burden. Let me know if I'm way off-base. This is the percent of total federal income taxes paid vs. adjusted gross income (AGI).
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/2...
http://www.american.com/archive/2007/nov...
http://tf-live.pjdoland.com/news/show/19...
The conversation can be complicated by including other types of taxes, but I am referring only to federal income taxes. The other variable is what kinds of income are included.
As I said, the debate seems to start when there is talk of tax cuts. Invariably, any talk of tax cuts can be analyzed to show that most of the tax cuts (dollar-wise) go to the wealthiest taxpayers. (Well duh). If tax cuts are across-the-board, that is self-evident.
Of course, in the Obama era we are talking about raising taxes on the "wealthiest", which is sure to kill jobs for those who need them most!
Sep 5, 2009 at 11:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
You sign union sign up cards from a union organizer now, this is a red herring.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.