► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Regulations’

Can We Add Agency Law To Our Growing List Of Grievances?

by Flyovercountry ( 94 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Fascism, Progressives, Regulation, Tranzis at March 5th, 2015 - 8:58 am

Tip of the hat to The Daily Caller whose video I did not embed here due to their insistence upon the usage of autoplay, something I view as evil. Please click here, for their story, complete with a recorded phone conversation in which an apologetic banker gets to tell a business owner who had held an account at said bank for over a decade, that the government had forced his account to be frozen for no other reason than the fact that the government no longer appreciates his industry’s contribution to our economy.

Yes, Operation Choke Point is an evil perpetrated by Barack Obama and Eric Holder. The fault dear Brutus however does not lie in our stars that we are underlings, but in ourselves. There are many who would point to the 60’s as the beginning of the Progressive’s gaining their stranglehold on our nation. Some point to FDR and the, “New Deal,” as that beginning point. I’ve heard that our troubles with the progressive movement date back to Woodrow Wilson and his Presidency. However, I would like to point out that the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments did far greater damage, even before Wilson took his position as our Chief Executive. (I realize that the Seventeenth Amendment became part of our Constitution about a month after Wilson’s Inauguration, but it was ratified before Wilson actually took office.) Many experts in our nation’s history will state that Teddy Roosevelt was the first Progressive to affect our national agenda, and granted he gave us a big push in that disastrous direction, and redefined the Executive Branch, but he was not where it all began. This all started with the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887. This was the first victory of the Progressive Movement, and it has grown into the behemoth that allows Barack Obama to act as a man elected to be our emperor, rather than our President.

For those who are not familiar with it, the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 established our very first Federal Agency. This agency was vested with the ability to create its own rules, its own authority to enforce those rules, and its own system to adjudicate the process for any who wished to push back against the decisions of the agency. Quite literally, we had managed to create an entity that had contained within its scope of operation, a body that was vested with all of the powers of governance, thus doing away with the separation of powers. Since that date in our history, any and all legislation has been written purposefully vague, only ever including a desired outcome, with the specific rules to be determined later by either an existing federal agency, or through the creation of a new federal agency. It is With this wonderful exercise of genius that the destruction of our Constitutional Protections began. Agency Law was created with the establishment of the ICC in 1887. It should also be noted here, that it took almost exactly five years for the agency purportedly designed to keep the railroad men from becoming too powerful for the liking of those who lobbied for this legislation, to be peopled entirely with those, “robber barons,” so feared and vilified that the agency was thought necessary. Funny how that works out.

Once that happened, what we see today, even though it has taken 128 years to get here, became inevitable. Give Barack Obama credit for this at least. He saw the potential to simply ignore the U.S. Constitution afforded to him by this set of circumstances, and has taken full advantage of it. All he needs to do is suggest or ask that one of the agencies situated under the federal umbrella, write some additional rules to add to the scope under which they operate, and he pretty much can enact unilaterally anything he wishes to codify as law. Yes, technically such efforts can be overturned by our Judicial Branch, and indeed many of these actions have been thus far. However, our Judicial Branch moves too slowly to monitor or even address every such indiscretion. Even if it were capable of keeping up, Agency Law itself has become so ingrained in our society, such Judicial oversight and pushback has itself become all too rare.

In our history, there have been two Presidents who’ve tried earnestly to do something to put an end to, or at least reign in this system run amok. The first was Richard Nixon, and I’m sure you all remember what happened to him for his efforts. The second was Ronald Reagan, who also failed, and in fact discussed that failure as being his lasting regret.

So far, 26 states throughout the fruited plains have formally adopted ballot initiatives in favor of an Article V Convention for the purpose of proposing and debating Constitutional Amendments. I am most definitely in favor of this. By the way, many of the Liberals in our nation are as well, since they’re convinced that they would be able to alter the First Amendment to, “correct,” the Citizens United Decision.

One amendment that I’d like to see come to fruition would be something to put an end to Agency Law. Consider for one moment what this system has allowed for a President with dictatorial ambitions to do in only the short amount of time from early November until now. Barack Obama has rewritten our Immigration law, repealed the Second Amendment, pledged to unilaterally raise our taxes, promised to confiscate our 401k’s, threatened to fire the entirety of the retail financial services industry, instituted cap and trade, inflicted net neutrality, signed some very questionable treaties without the requisite Senatorial Consent, changed existing law, and all of this done with the statement that he gave Congress the chance to do what he wanted before he did it alone.

Don’t blame the Bamster however. While his actions are bad enough, it was we the people who didn’t realize that gridlock was itself a perk, gifted to us by the founding fathers, rather than a problem as proclaimed by the low information voting crowd. Barack Obama is merely the messenger, who has alerted us to a huge problem, and one that hopefully we can figure out how to correct.

Ronald Reagan campaigned on a platform that included ending the Department of Education and the Department of Energy. If the single most popular President in the modern era could not rid us of the two most unpopular facets of the federal behemoth, as he’d promised to do while campaigning, then what chance would anyone have to actually do something about reducing the size and scope of government? We keep talking about the symptoms, meanwhile, the cancer grows free. Something must be done to reign this monster in, and unless Agency Law itself is addressed, nothing will be successful.

Cross Posted from Musings of a Mad Conservative.

Tax-Spend-Regulate

by coldwarrior ( 72 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, government, Politics, Regulation at July 12th, 2011 - 11:30 am

Tax-Spend-Regulate…those seem to be the modern functions of government.

 

Right now the GOP leadership and the president are in negotiations over two of the three heads of this evil hydra-headed government monster (funny. i accidentally typed mobster; hmmmm….maybe mobster is a better analogy)

 

Regardless of mobster or monster, the cost to the economy is exactly the same, regulations ARE taxation when we get down to the bottom line. If fedgov says you have to do X, then you have to pay to do X. For Example, that environmental remediation company has to come in and make your factory compliant to regulations.  In effect, the fedgov just took money out of your pocket and gave it to another company…a tax, no matter how you slice it.

 

All of those regulations force many companies to hire lawyers just to prevent the company from accidentally running afoul of one of the ten thousand plus regulations int the Federal Register. Hiring all of these lawyers is also a tax. It takes money from companies and subsidizes the legal industry. (I am not beating on lawyers here, just an example).

 

Right now. In DC, the powers that be are deciding the tax and spend part of the above equation. Why not bring regulations into the negotiation mix as well, Speaker Boehner. After all, regulations cost money  out here in job creation land. Why not cut taxes, spending, and regulating?

 

(Ironically, i thought of this topic last night and started writing it this morning, then I read this: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271503/put-ceiling-overregulation-john-berlau?page=2

Looks like they beat me to the presses!) so, at that point i quit writing and decided to work on the Honey-Do list.

 

Do check out the above article at NRO.

 

Check this link!  Great idea!

 

 

 

 

CSA2010 is here…

by savage ( 143 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, Regulation, Transportation at July 20th, 2010 - 7:00 pm

CSA2010 (Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010) is here, like it or not. What this provision in the DOT (Department of Transportation) is does not bode well for the trucking industry. Let me explain what CSA2010 is, what its goal is, and how this will affect the basis of the trucking industry, which is the lifeblood of commerce in the United States. This program of the DOT will affect everyone in the country. As I have always said, the only thing not delivered by a truck is a baby.

In the world of trucking, safety is the key to minimize loss of life and property along our national road network, be it interstate highways, US highways and state and county roads, all the way down to city streets, dirt roads and driveways, wherever you may find them. Safety is a worthy goal in any endeavor to be sure, but the federal government is going about it the wrong way if you ask me.

The DOT, or more specifically the FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration) has used a program known as Safestat to rank a company’s safety ratings into 4 Safety Evaluation Areas (SEA), Accident, Driver, Vehicle and Safety. All the data collected by the government at weigh stations and portable scales is fed into Safestat. This program has worked efficiently for many years.

When discussing CSA2010, the safety ratings are now known as Behavioral Analysis and Safety Improvement Categories, or BASIC, and are divided into 7 areas, Unsafe Driving, Fatigued Driving, Driver Fitness, Controlled Substances and Alcohol, Vehicle Maintenance, Cargo Related, and Crash Indicator. All of this data will be used to assign a rating to each individual carrier. But here is the catch. The actions of an individual driver will affect the rating of every driver that is employed by that carrier.

Let me give you one example of many things that can put a driver out of work due to the actions of another driver who may be 2500 miles away. Suppose a driver gets pulled into the Winchester VA inspection station and the inspection officer puts the driver out of service due to a faulty mudflap on a company owned trailer he is pulling, writes him a ticket and enters it into the Virginia state database. I can be driving in the state of California and get pulled into a state scale there and I can be put out of service and not allowed to drive all due to the actions of a driver I do not know in a place 2800 miles away. In addition, I find it detestable that I am betting my career on something that I have very little control over, that being maintenance issues that were under the control of someone I do not know or have no relationship to except for the fact that he and I work for the same firm.

This system is ripe for fraud and abuse all in the name of ‘safety’. There is also something else that has been going on behind the scenes I find very disturbing.

On October 27, 2009, the FMCSA briefed the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation and the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure about the implementation of CSA2010. You can find the Congressional Briefing at this page.

On November 3, 2009, there was a news item regarding Warren Buffett that appeared on MSNBC.com about his purchase of BNSF for 34 billion dollars.

IF the CSA2010 program is implemented without any modifications or changes, I foresee the following three things happen.

a. Most smaller companies today will be forced to stop business operations if too many of their drivers have their Commercial Drivers Licenses pulled. Owner-operators that are leased to smaller companies will also share in this situation. Why make the unemployment rate of one of the largest sectors of the US economy grow larger? We have enough unemployment as it is right now.
b. Most of the large companies today also have an intermodal division, such as JB Hunt, Schneider National, Swift Transportation and others. If the smaller outfits are put out of business due to CSA2010, logically, more freight will be picked up by these large firms and put on the railroad, increasing the profits of Warren Buffett.
c. Freight rates WILL go up across the board if there is lack of competitition. Free and fair competition has made America the envy of the planet when it comes to our way of life. With the implementation of CSA2010, the government is very close to putting in place defacto monopolization of the freight industry in the United States. The Feds should remember how John D. Rockefeller was running the oil industry and what happened to Standard Oil.

I question the timing of the implementation of CSA2010. Why is the Obama Administration very quietly putting CSA2010 into practice? Why haven’t there been press releases or news stories about CSA2010?

In my point of view (and I am one of many that share this), this is yet another heavy handed action of the Obama Administration to dismantle our way of life. Higher prices in virtually everything will occur and most people know it. If it costs more to bring things to market, who do you think will end up paying more? Not the freight outfits and not the railroads, they will factor that into their rates. Yes, you and I and everyone you know will get kicked in the teeth.

In my opinion, put the brakes on this anticapitalistic government program and leave each state to decide how to deal with safety.