January 2012

Labor’s Day at the Federalist Society

by Vincent Vernuccio on November 16, 2009 · 2 comments

in Deregulate to Stimulate, Economy, Labor, Regulation

Workers may get violent if their wages are cut. The United Auto Workers union (UAW) has a monopoly and was an anchor on the Big Three U.S. automakers. These two ideas were professed by two labor leaders at the recent Federalist Society Convention in Washington, D.C.

There may be violence, says Damon A. Silvers, Associate General Counsel for the AFL-CIO and Deputy Chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel for TARP. Silvers spoke on last Friday’s panel “Labor: Wall Street, Labor Unions, and the Obama Administration: A New Paradigm for Capitol and Labor?” Speaking to the panel, he claimed economic downturns which cause people to have their wages cut, can have devastating results.

Silvers pointed to wage cuts in Brazil and spoke of the violence which ensued. He argued that when people are starving they may get violent, that the have nots will take from the haves. Quickly cautioning that this could not happen in the United States, he smirked and added, “but it may.” Not so subtly, Silvers implied that if you cut union wages there may be violence.

Another gem from the convention came from Thursday’s lead discussion “Redistribution of Wealth.” One presenter, when asked what happened to the auto industry in regards to unions, stated, “Unions missed the most basic fundamental economic role they have to play, which is to take wages out of competition. What happened was when they had a monopoly or took wages out of competition for the Big Three people competed more inefficiently…When the transplants came…the union didn’t do its job, it was an anchor to the competitive field as opposed to a help.”

Which right leaning free-market intellectuals stated this fact? None other than any Andrew Stern, the president of the SEIU! That is correct, Andy Stern blamed the collapse of the Big Three in part to the union monopoly of the UAW and called it an anchor to competition.

More characteristically, Stern also spoke of redistribution of wealth saying, “I do no support, I condemn, the redistribution of wealth — that is to say, the redistribution of wealth upwards.”

Advocating the redistribution of wealth? Cautioning of violence if wages are cut? Is this really the message top officials in the two largest labor unions want to be sending? Both Stern and Silvers knew their audience did not agree with them – Stern was sweating during his presentation – but did make an effort to speak to the constitutionally minded lawyers association.

Unfortunately, while tempered, their message was a clear endorsement of class warfare. Espousing unions as the only way for workers to get ahead in America, they chastised the Reagan era and directly blamed the demise of unions for what they claimed were lower worker wages. They ignored facts of other presenters showing that most workers’ standard of living has actually gone up in the last 30 years.

Stern should be given credit for acknowledging that the UAW monopoly helped almost destroy the American auto industry. He must acknowledge that hard work, innovation, and ingenuity are the real engine of the American economy, not collective bargaining. The monopolistic nature of unions in many industries is a liability to both workers and unions. As Stern pointed out in the context of the failure of the U.S. auto industry, unions’ inflexibility can drag down companies and work as a hindrance, not a help.

Regulation of the Day 73: Snow Globes as Terrorist Threat

by Ryan Young on November 16, 2009

in Culture, Mobility, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Regulation, Regulation of the Day

Some of the TSA’s critics say the agency its own reductio ad absurdum. TSA’s latest action does nothing to improve security, but much to prove its critics correct. Snow globes are now banned from carry-on luggage (hat tip: Radley Balko).

This means one of two things: either grandmothers with snow globes in their carry-ons are the biggest terrorist threat facing the country, or the TSA is doing something wrong.

The way to prevent terrorism is to make terrorism difficult. Banning snow globes doesn’t make terrorism any more difficult.

Yes, larger snow globes probably violate the TSA’s three-ounce limit for liquids. But they are not bombs. They are, in fact, snow globes.

Health-Care “Reform” Bills Increase Costs, Endanger Access for Millions, Federal Experts Say

by Hans Bader on November 15, 2009 · 1 comment

in Health and Illness, Healthcare, Insurance, Legal, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Regulation

The healthcare “reform” bill backed by Obama “would reduce senior care,” and “could jeopardize access to care for millions,” report healthcare experts at the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. The bill also “increases medical costs” through inflation, increasing health-care costs to 21.1 percent of GDP by 2019.

The House of Representatives recently passed the bill by a vote of 220 to 215.

According to the federal experts, the bill would likely either cost much more than projected, or result in some “hospitals and nursing homes” deciding to ”stop taking Medicare altogether,” notes the Washington Post.

The bill will increase taxes to “European levels of taxation,” while failing to provide European-style universal coverage.  It will vastly increase the costs of our health care system, rather than reducing it to European levels.   It reinforces foolish restrictions on national competition in health insurance, which do not exist in Europe.

Doctors afraid of being wrongly sued for malpractice despite providing good quality care order unnecessary tests (or defensive medicine), which wastes at least $200 billion annually. That’s nearly as much money as France spends on health-care for all its citizens.  The bill does nothing to reduce such costs, ignoring lessons from Europe.  (Many European countries have specialized health courts, rather than American-style jury trials, to cut lawyers’ bills, speedily compensate the injured, and prevent American-style baseless lawsuits against doctors.)

In European countries like France, doctors don’t need to be paid as much, because competing professions, like lawyers, are paid less.  European law is generally much more conservative than American law when it comes to lawsuits, including lawsuits against doctors.  Punitive damages are generally forbidden, and lawsuits are discouraged by making unsuccessful plaintiffs pay the other side’s legal bills.

The health-care bills backed by Obama also contain lots of waste and subsidies for politically-correct things like “cultural competency,” while cutting spending on crucial things like anesthesia.

Obama’s proposals contain provisions that he falsely claims will cut costs, but which actually exploded costs when tried by state governments.

UPS vs. FedEx

by Michelle Minton on November 15, 2009

in Odds & Ends

Here’s an interesting video from ReasonTV (a Reason Magazine offshoot) that mimics the popular UPS whiteboard commercials. In this video Nick Gillespie details the war UPS is waging against FedEx in the regulatory arena. The fight centers on labor laws. Because UPS ships by ground while FedEx ships via air they are governed by two different sets of labor laws. The laws that govern UPS workers makes it easier for them to unionize, raising the labor costs for the company. Instead of attempting to reform the labor laws governing its own workforce, UPS is petitioning the government to place FedEx under the same onerous regulations to create an “even playing field”. This entertaining video points out that UPS isn’t the villain in the scenario. Though it may be utilizing a short-sighted business strategy, UPS is taking steps that make short-term business sense in a market that is completely skewed. The real villain, as the video points out, is a government that has the power help those businesses it favors and “crush” other businesses as it wishes.

Flu Watch Nov. 14 – What Swine Flu ISN’T Doing This Week

by Michael Fumento on November 13, 2009 · 1 comment

in Odds & Ends

Yes, even as the media twist and turn the numbers in the new CDC estimate (about which I’ll be publishing an article) the evidence continues to come in that swine flu in the U.S. has peaked and is sliding down the right side of the epidemic slope.

Here we see a sharp decline in both new deaths and hospitalizations.

Last week there was a massive decline in samples submitted to the CDC surveillance labs and a small decline in those testing positive. This week the bottom fell out. Samples submitted have gone from about 26,000 to 21,000 to just 13,000. Almost 39% of those samples were positive two weeks ago; now it’s just 30%. Put another way, the CDC labs received 10,076 positive samples two weeks ago, 7,557 last week, and just 3,834 this week. That’s a plummet of positive sample of over 60% in just two weeks!

Even hysteria seems to have peaked – if only ever so slightly. Last week just under 8% of all emergency room visits were for those ubiquitous “flu-like symptoms.” This week, it’s just under 7%. Not exactly a 60% drop in the last three weeks, but then the media are laboring mightily to prop up those figures.

College infections have are still essentially flat.

In other countries, at least, it seems people are starting to catch on. London’s Independent newspaper asks: “Pandemic? What Pandemic?” It gives the following figures:

65,000
Number of deaths in worst-case scenario for Britain published in July

19,000
Revised worst-case scenario outlined in September

1,000
Revised worst-case scenario last month

154
Number of deaths in Britain so far

4-8,000
Average annual death toll in Britain from seasonal winter flu

But in America we remain with wool firmly pulled over eyes. Still, some are having fun with all this. Check out this neat swine flu music video, “The Swine Flu Blues!”

Andrew Cuomo Sues Intel

by Ryan Young on November 13, 2009

in Deregulate to Stimulate, Economy, Legal, Regulation, Tech & Telecom

Over at the Washington Examiner‘s Opinion Zone, Wayne Crews and I explain why New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo’s antitrust lawsuit against Intel is a mistake.

Calling Intel’s business practices “bribery” and “coercion” is little more than argument by assertion. Rebates and exclusivity deals are normal competitive behavior. Not only is Intel facing increasing competition in its home turf, that small segment is hardly the extent of the relevant competitive market. Intel faces an uncertain future as consumer tastes shift to smaller products powered by non-Intel chips. Cuomo’s antitrust lawsuit does not stand up to scrutiny. It deserves to be dropped.

Antitrust policies thwart the competitive process whenever and wherever they are applied.

Nanny State Beer

by Angela Logomasini on November 13, 2009 · 1 comment

in Nanny State, Personal Liberty

Nanny state regulators in the United Kingdom have been up in arms about a beer–Tokyo released by BrewDog– that dares to contain just over 18 percent alcohol! One legislator even submitted a motion in the Scotland Parliament condemning the beer. Others have called for for regulations. “It is completely irresponsible and a real worry … It highlights the need for a mandatory code for the alcohol industry to prevent irresponsible drinks promotions such as this,” noted a representative of a the UK-based British Liver Trust.

BrewDog’s response? As recently reported by the blog BevLaw, BrewDog markets a product called “Nanny State Beer” for all those regulators and others who just can’t control themselves! It has just 1.1 percent alcohol. Its label reads:

Society today is an all too dangerous place.

ASBO-ed [Anti-Social Behaviour Order] three year olds loitering in alley ways, CCTV [Closed-circuit television] recording our every move and misplaced suitcases grinding entire public transport infrastructures to a halt.

No wonder you’ve been reduced to a quivering wreck, battening down the hatches at three in the afternoon with Ofcom [Office of Communications] on speed dial.

At BrewDog we appreciate your inability to know your limits – especially when it comes to alcohol – which is why we’ve created Nanny State.

This idiosyncratic little beer is a gentle smack in the right direction.

It’s time to draw your net curtains, sit back with Nanny and watch your favourite episode of Last Of The Summer Wine. It’s finally safe to enjoy alcohol again.

Please note: BrewDog recommends that you only drink this beer whilst wearing the necessary personal protective equipment and in a premises that has passed a full health and safety risk assessment for optimum enjoyment.

Good that BrewDog has a sense of humor, and fortunately, their products remain on the market–at least for now. What’s not funny, is the growing nanny-state mentality and what it can do to our freedoms. Beer is just one of their many targets. Watch out for regulations on soda, car windows, water, and even your waistline!

Image: From BrewDog blog site.

FDA gives beverage companies 30 days

by Michelle Minton on November 13, 2009

in Odds & Ends

The FDA is getting into the business of mixing drinks.  Employing a dangerously questionable array of regulatory powers, the agency is trying to determine if the  the combination of caffeine and alcohol is a tempting and harmful brew for underage drinkers. Rather than do any investigative work of their own, they are giving producers of these drinks 30 days to prove that the alcoholic energy drinks are safe.

What makes them think these drinks are not safe? As difficult as this is to believe, some consumers have reported that the drinks apparently encourage “risky behavior.”  Shocker.

The FDA contends that the real purpose of their investigation is to make sure the beverage companies are not pandering these products toward underage adolescents because the cans look very much like non-alcoholic energy drinks that are marketed toward youths. This video details the dangers of low prices and appealing packaging. Careful corporations, you might just improve your sales!

Stories like this highlight the utter worthlessness of the FDA. It isn’t that consumers are complaining that the drinks are bad, that the beverage companies are making false claims, or that they have broken any laws or violated anyone’s rights. Simply put, some people have it in their heads that these drinks have effects they don’t like and they are appealing to government to stop others from voluntarily consuming these products, the effects of which they seem enjoy.

Regardless of marketing, it’s illegal to sell alcohol to minors. So, if it is the case that youths are purchasing these alcoholic energy drinks, is it the beverage companies fault and responsibility? Or should the appropriate enforcement agency i.e. the police, investigate potential violations of the law?

Mixing trade and global warming — a recipe for disaster

by Fran Smith on November 13, 2009 · 1 comment

in Global Warming, International, Trade

Oh dear!  Staunch trade proponent Fred Bergsten of the Peterson Institute is in bed with radical trade opponent Lori Wallach of Public Citizen in a joint op-ed in the Washington Post today.  It seems Bergsten thinks there’s no chance of a legislative cap on CO2 emissions unless the U.S. does something to address the competitiveness issues, and he’s against “border tax adjustments” because of its potentially devastating effect on the world trading system.

That’s the good part.  The bad part is that both he and Wallach want to combine the two issues – global warming and trade – and deal with them together. That was a recommendation that the Peterson Institute for International Economics made in a study earlier this year. What that would mean still seems a bit vague.  According to the op-ed, this synthesis would involve –

. . . a new code of “best practices” on greenhouse gas emission controls, including establishment of “policy space” for countries to limit emissions without sacrificing the competitive position of their industries. The institute also recommended that countries adopt a time-limited “peace clause” in which pursuit of new trade barriers would be suspended while the negotiations proceeded, and that a global climate accord be linked to a new global trade accord.

The synthesis would seem to involve  countries agreeing to a “code” that would address restrictions on CO2 emissions  and be generally consistent with WTO rules even if some technical rules would be violated.  Countries signing up for the code would agree not to bring those technical issues to the WTO for dispute resolution (the “peace clause”).

Those “technical” issues, in practice, however, are likely to become substantive issues, as countries enact  a broad array of restrictive  measures to protect their own industries.  But, never fear, the Peterson Institute also recommends in its book that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change or some international arbiter decide when a code member isn’t in compliance with its international commitments.  Then, if that’s the case, other code members could take trade reprisals against that non-complying member.

Does this sound like a simple plan that would run smoothly?  Not in my book.

The article concludes with a bit of hyperbole — that the “only way to solve our problems is to treat them together.”  Otherwise, we’ll have “paralysis.”

Given the fact that global warming policy prescriptions have been extremely controversial even before the Kyoto Protocol 12 years ago, and the fact that the WTO’s Doha Round for 8 years has been mired down in disagreements among rich and poor countries, does it seem likely that putting these two divisive issues together will produce harmony?

CEI Weekly: Celebrating the Fall of the Berlin Wall

by Charles Huang on November 13, 2009 · 1 comment

in Economy, Energy, Environment, Features, International, Legal, Personal Liberty, Zeitgeist

CEI Weekly is a compilation of articles and blog posts from CEI’s fellows and associates sent out via e-mail every Friday. Also included in the Weekly newsletter is a brief description of CEI’s weekly podcast and a feature on a major CEI breakthrough made during the week. To sign up for CEI Weekly, go to http://cei.org/newsletters.


CEI Weekly
November 13, 2009


>>CEI Commemorates the 20th Anniversary of the Fall of the Berlin Wall
[Video] CEI Studios Produces Video Commemorating the Fall of the Berlin Wall
CEI marked the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall on Monday, November 9th, with a video which depicted the ruinous effects the wall had on the lives of those who live in Berlin. The video was linked to by several bloggers such as Michelle Malkin and John Stossel, as well as by several organizations, such as the Heartland Institute and In Defence of Liberty.
Additionally, Fred Smith, with a blog post, highlighted the emotional toll that the Berlin Wall took on those who lived in Berlin.


>>Shaping the Debate
Sued for Success
Ryan Radia’s op-ed in Forbes.com

Should We Be Worried About Cell Phones and Cancer
Ryan Young’s article in Opposing Views

Government Can’t Marshall Doctors Who Aren’t There
Alex Nowrasteh’s letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal


>>Best of the Blogs
Insurance Industry Stung by Health Care Deal
by Gregory Conko
With much of the health care reform debate still focused on the wisdom of including a government-run, “public” health insurance “option,” too many opponents are neglecting a far more insidious feature of the Democratic proposals:  the mandatory purchase requirement.  Under each of the bills moving through Congress, every person living in the United States would be required by law to have health insurance.

Unemployment Skyrockets: “U.S. Now Beating European Unemployment Rates”
by Hans Bader
Unemployment is now higher in the U.S. than in Europe,  reports the Washington Post.  “The official U.S. unemployment rate, reported last Friday, now stands at 10.2 percent,” compared to “9.7 percent” in Europe.   This is the highest rate in more than 26 years, and marks a huge change from the recent past, in which unemployment was double the American rate in much of Europe, such as in France. Unemployment is at 10 percent in France, which refused to adopt a U.S.-style stimulus package, and only 7.6 percent in Germany, which adopted a stimulus package that was smaller relative to its economy than ours was.

Pfizer to Close Facility Behind Kelo Case
by Marc Scribner
Yesterday, Pfizer announced it was closing its research and development facility in New London, Connecticut. This is the same complex that was at the center of the redevelopment plan at issue in Kelo v. New London. This turn of events underscores the argument, often employed by eminent domain opponents, that government-sponsored development corporations lack the economic foresight to efficiently make long-term development investment decisions.


>>Liberty Week Podcast
Liberty Week 68: Take From the Rich, Give to Yourself
We start with Saturday night’s healthcare vote in the House, Freddie Mac’s losing bets and a gift card scandal in Charm City. We then move on to Andrew Cuomo’s attack on Intel in New York and Josh tells us why we can expect more tax hikes in the future.


>>Support CEI

Like what you read?

The Competitive Enterprise Institute’s 25-year record of success is made possible by our over 3,000 supporters. Make sure to stop by www.cei.org/support and make a donation to continue your support or become a supporter. Curious about all the possible ways to donate to CEI? Contact Al Canata at acanata@cei.org or 202-331-2280 to find out more.

Charles Huang

Web and Media Associate

Competitive Enterprise Institute

chuang@cei.org

http://www.cei.org

http://www.openmarket.org

202-331-1010

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →