In national news: Congressman Kurt Schrader of Oregon announced last week that he is withdrawing his support of the CARE Act, the piece of legislation that will likely make it more difficult for small producers of wine, beer, and spirits to reach the market. In his statement, Rep. Schrader noted that after listening to the concerns of Oregon’s wine growers he now believes the legislation would be detrimental to their industry.
Also in national news: The Small BREW Act picked up a new cosponsor. Congressman Brad Miller of North Carolina signed onto the act that will reduce costs for small brewers and allow them to brew more while still being considered “small.” Currently, small brewers are defined as those making not more than 2 million barrels a year. The BREW Act would up that to 6 million barrels a year. The act also cuts the excise tax rate on the first 60,000 barrels for small brewers from $7 a barrel to $3.50 a barrel. The additional barrels after 60,000 and up to 2 million will be taxed at $16 a barrel.
Arizona: A ballot initiative is underway in Arizona that could give residents the chance to vote on whether or not they’d like a new tax on their alcohol. The tax would amount to 25 cents on every gallon of hard liquor and a dollar on every gallon on beer and wine. Like many other “sin taxes,” this will go to community programs and is sold as a remedy to the financial toll that alcohol abuse has on communities. Of course, this new tax would be in addition to the alcohol taxes that Arizona already has. Currently, the state of Arizona extracts $3 per gallon of spirits, 84 cents on every gallon of wine, and 16 cents on each gallon of beer. There are no plans to give money back to people for the scientifically proven health benefits of moderate alcohol consumption.
Connecticut: Earlier this month, Connecticut Governor Malloy released details of his plans to update the state’s alcohol laws. Among other things, Malloy hopes to legalize Sunday sales of alcohol, get rid of the holiday sales bans, and eliminate minimum pricing. If successful, the new laws will hopefully reduce costs for consumers and prevent residents from buying their booze in neighboring states.
[click to continue…]
Only in Bizarro World can you claim someone is your attorney — and thus shielded by attorney work-product privilege — and then insist in the very next breath that they never represented you. But that is what the Obama administration and Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan are doing. The Obama administration refuses to release its communications with Kagan about health care litigation back when she was the administration’s Solicitor General, on the grounds that they are covered by attorney work-product protection. Yet, contradictorily, it and Kagan insist that she never acted as the administration’s lawyer in the matter, and thus doesn’t need to recuse herself from hearing the constitutional challenges to Obamacare that will be decided by the Supreme Court this year.
Law Professor Ronald Rotunda, the co-author of a leading constitutional law treatise, says that Kagan should have recused herself from hearing the case based on the federal statute, 28 U.S.C. 455(b)(3), that forbids former government attorneys like Kagan from being involved in cases they earlier were consulted on, and the Judicial Conference’s ethical guidance for federal judges. As he notes:
[Commentators have been] calling on Justice Elena Kagan to disqualify herself in the ObamaCare litigation because of her role, as Solicitor General, in preparing its constitutional defense. These calls have intensified with the release of recent emails. Justice Kagan’s supporters respond that she testified in her confirmation hearings that she had nothing to do with ObamaCare
First, her phraseology was much more precise. She said she would only recuse herself from any case in which she “officially formally approved something,” or “served as counsel of record” or “played any substantial role.” But the statute requires disqualification if Kagan, as a federal employee (she was the former Solicitor General) “participated” as an “adviser” on a matter, even if she did not give any formal advice. She also must disqualify herself if her impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
In response to a Freedom of Information (FOIA) request, the Obama Administration has turned over some emails but it refuses to turn over many others because, it says, these emails are “protected by the attorney work product doctrine.” That doctrine, the DOJ affidavit explains, covers discussion by “OSG” (Office of Solicitor General) lawyers about “legal issues, arguments, and strategy concerning anticipated” litigation over ObamaCare. So, the DOJ is simultaneously claiming that it completely walled off Kagan from any discussions involving the constitutional defense of ObamaCare, while admitting that Kagan was participating in emails discussing “legal issues, arguments, and strategy concerning” the anticipated ObamaCare litigation.
[click to continue…]
Proponents of government collective bargaining view it as a fundamental human right. The shameful actions of SEIU in Michigan, however, undermine this claim.
In 2005, Michigan lawmakers signed off to create the Michigan Quality Community Care Council (MQC3). MQC3 maintains a registry of homecare providers to assist Medicaid recipients looking for a caregiver. In reality, the primary function of MQC3 was to make 45,000 private homecare providers government employees and dues-paying union members.
In 2006, SEIU took advantage of Michigan law deeming homecare providers government employees. To gain exclusive representation SEIU organized a covert union campaign. The stealth-organizing tactic led to 20 percent voter turnout and SEIU won a landslide victory.
Soon thereafter, SEIU obtained a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with the state. The events following the CBA expose the dangers of government union political influence and permanence of CBAs.
MQC3, acting as a “dummy” employer for homecare workers, created a mechanism for union dues to be siphoned off Medicaid checks. Not only is it illegal to unionize homecare workers who are private contractors, homecare workers already have employers: their Medicaid beneficiaries. Worse, the scheme wholly rejects the purpose of Medicaid by diverting funds from individuals who cannot afford medical care to Big Labor.
[click to continue…]
As Michael Tanner noted this weekend in The New York Post, “the current state of our union can be summed up in just two words: We’re broke.” In his State of the Union address,
The president devoted just 189 words to the deficit and our growing national debt, but the fact is that once again this year we will borrow 32 cents out of every dollar we spend. Overall, our national debt now tops $15.2 trillion (with Congress raising the debt ceiling to $16.4 trillion last week). And that doesn’t count the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare. Throw those in, and our total indebtedness exceeds $120 trillion.
That means that if one counts only the official national debt, every man, woman and child in America owes $48,700. Include the unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare, and every one of us is in debt to the tune of $189,000. . . measured as a percentage of [our economy,] our budget deficit is roughly a quarter larger than France’s. In fact, among European countries, only Greece and Ireland have larger deficits this year than we do.
The debt figures paint an even grimmer picture. If one includes all the unfunded liabilities of pension and health-care systems, Greece’s total debt equals 875% of its GDP. . .The United States, however, now owes 885% of GDP, more than any other industrialized country.
[click to continue…]
OPINION
MARK P. MILLS & JULIO M. OTTINO: “The Coming Tech-Led Boom”
“In January 1912, the United States emerged from a two-year recession. Nineteen more followed—along with a century of phenomenal economic growth. Americans in real terms are 700% wealthier today. [...] In January 2012, we sit again on the cusp of three grand technological transformations with the potential to rival that of the past century. All find their epicenters in America: big data, smart manufacturing and the wireless revolution.”
NICK GILLESPIE & MATT WELCH: “Learning From Kodak’s Demise”
“The human brain is capable of memorizing 67,890 digits of pi, composing side two of Exile on Main Street, and inventing a dog-to-human translation device called the Bowlingual. Yet, we often-brilliant, always-innovating bipeds find it impossible to imagine changing the trajectory of the world we think we live in by more than a few degrees at any given moment. Whatever dominates today we assume will dominate tomorrow. This is true for our private lives, this is true for commerce, and this is especially true for politics.”
ALICE G. WALTON: “Cell Phones Are More Annoying Than They Are Dangerous”
“With increased use come questions concerning the safety of these mobile devices. Many have been concerned, or even panicked, over the possibility of cell phones increasing one’s risk for brain cancer. Also disturbing is the fact that people are talking — or perhaps worse, texting (DOC) — while driving, and getting into accidents because of it. And then there’s sexting, which has a ‘reputation as a teenage pastime,’ according to the New York Times. Brain tumors, car accidents, and virtual sex contact: Cell phones seem to carry a wealth of hazards. However — and there may still be some lingering questions — more studies are coming in to suggest that cell phones aren’t as strongly connected with any of these phenomena as we once thought. ”
[click to continue…]
As an article in the Financial Post noted, if Mitt Romney were Canadian, he’d pay less tax than he does in America.
That’s because most of Mitt Romney’s income is from investments. Much of the world taxes investment income far less than the U.S. does, while taxing consumption more, through a Value Added Tax (VAT). Those countries are more generous to savers, unlike our tax code, which favors spenders.
The belief that the richest 1 percent in Europe and Canada subsidize all of the other 99% is a common delusion on the American Left. It’s the basis for their fantasy that vast new government programs can be paid for simply by taxing the rich. But as Romney’s situation shows, it has no basis in reality.
Europe and Canada finance their more extensive welfare states heavily through VATs, taxes paid mostly by the middle and working classes, since VATs tax consumption, and lower-income people spend a higher percentage of their income than rich people do. Those countries don’t force rich people to pay 90 percent tax rates, as some Democratic lawmakers, like Congressman Jerry McNerney, have recently advocated.
They don’t attempt to tax even wealthy people’s investment income at confiscatory rates, because they have learned from painful experience that doing so discourages people from saving money or starting a business, and lowers investment and economic growth.
[click to continue…]
Over at PJMedia, I discuss the technical, economic and political feasibility of what Newt proposes. But as I note there, the hardest part is the politics:
It would be a tough sell to a Congress that is used to directing space funds to its campaign contributors — a prize wouldn’t give them an adequate amount of control over where the money ended up. And even if a President Gingrich could get the support of Congress to establish such a prize, there would be no guarantee that a future Congress wouldn’t rescind it, creating a great deal of uncertainty and risk for someone who wanted to pursue it. A private prize can escrow the funds, but there’s no sure-fire way for a fickle U.S. government to do so, particularly in times of trillion-dollar deficits, because the Constitution doesn’t allow a Congress to commit a future Congress to an expenditure. A prize fund would always be at risk of being raided for some more “worthy” social objective.
But there’s another problem. When Speaker Gingrich proposes that the settlement eventually become a U.S. state, he is implicitly advocating withdrawal from the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, which explicitly prohibits claims of national sovereignty off planet. The treaty can be withdrawn from with one year’s notice (and in fact Bob Bigelow has been warning over the past year that the Chinese intend to do exactly that), but getting the State Department and Senate to go along with abandoning a long-standing treaty that we helped negotiate, and which performs a lot of other vital functions, may be a non-starter politically. Better perhaps would be the approach of the Space Settlement Institute, which proposes to have the U.S. recognize private claims of non-state actors, which could accomplish the goal of allowing property on the moon without the need to withdraw from the OST. It would also provide a tradable market in lunar real estate, allowing private settlement ventures to raise funds without the need for taxpayer money. It wouldn’t be a U.S. state, but it might be a settlement of Americans, with American values, which is probably what the former speaker’s goal is.
[click to continue…]
In his State of the Union address, President Obama, a consistent supporter of bailouts and crony capitalism, hypocritically railed against them, proclaiming, “no bailouts, no handouts, and no cop-outs.” Just a couple days later, though, his administration is rolling out a massive multibillion dollar bailout that will enrich speculators. Bloomberg News reports that the Obama Administration is vastly expanding aid for certain “delinquent homeowners,” paying banks up to 63 cents for every dollar in principal they write off for such homeowners, a tripling of what banks can currently get under the HAMP bailout program. Speculators will benefit, too: they don’t even have to live in a house to get its mortgage principal reduced: “Investors who rent out their properties would be eligible to refinance under the new rules.” In the coming weeks, the Obama administration is expected to roll out an ill-conceived mass mortgage refinancing program that could shrink your 401(k) and increase the cost of mortgage financing for future borrowers.
We previously wrote about the voodoo economics behind the Obama administration’s mortgage bailout ideas, which will cost taxpayers countless billions.
Obama’s State of the Union address also contained false claims about outsourcing and corporate taxes. The Obama administration has used green-jobs money from the stimulus package to enrich foreign green-energy firms and outsource American jobs to countries like China: “79 percent” of all green-jobs funding “went to companies based overseas,” and “the largest grant” it made “went to Babcock & Brown,” a “bankrupt Australian company,” noted the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University. This just one of the ways the Obama administration used taxpayer money to outsource American jobs to foreign countries.
The most recent dispatch from the Weird, Wide World of Regulation:
- The Anacostia Cab Association is a D.C.-based company that hires willing employees to give rides to willing customers. The city is cracking down on them at their competitors’ behest.
- Both U.S. Senate candidates in Massachusetts want to strictly limit political speech. They believe their campaigns should have free rein, but they don’t want other people to have the ability to publicly express their opinions. Jeff Jacoby has more in a wonderful column titled “Shut Up, They Explained.”
- The 2012 Federal Register is already up to 4,456 pages. It’s still January.
- The most bizarre regulation of the year could well be this Alabama bill “prohibiting the sale or manufacture of food or products which contain aborted human fetuses.” SB 1418 would ostensibly ban stem-cell research in the state.
- A local ordinance in Suffolk, Virginia, prohibits driving motorized vehicles under their own power within city limits.
- The IRS is once again making noises about wanting to do your taxes for you. I’ve written before on why this is a bad idea, but it looks like I may have to explain myself a little more clearly.
RSS Updates 
RSS E-Mail Updates 
Twitter 
Facebook 
CEI.org 
WorkPlaceChoice.org 
GlobalWarming.org 
CEI On Demand Video 
Liberty Week Podcast 