President Obama has overseen a dramatic expansion of the regulatory state that will outlast his time in the White House.
The reach of the executive branch has advanced steadily on his watch, further solidifying the power of bureaucrats who churn out regulations that touch nearly every aspect of American life and business.
Experts debate whether federal rulemaking has accelerated under Obama, but few dispute that Washington — for better or worse — is reaching deeper than ever before into the workings of society.
“It would be difficult for anyone to pretend that this isn’t a high water mark in terms of regulation,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office who now heads the American Action Forum.
Obama famously signaled his intent to use the machinery of government to further his policy goals after the 2010 elections, declaring: “Where Congress won’t act, I will.”
Since then, the administration has pressed ahead unilaterally on several fronts, including immigration, gun control, cyber security and sentencing guidelines for drug offenses.
Meanwhile, new federal rules are accumulating faster than outdated ones are removed, resulting in a steady increase in the number of federal mandates.
Data collected by researchers at George Mason University’s Mercatus Center shows that the Code of Federal Regulations, where all rules and regulations are detailed, has ballooned from 71,224 pages in 1975 to 174,545 pages last year.
“All incentives are to regulate more,” said Susan Dudley, the director of George Washington University’s Regulatory Studies Center.
The fight over executive power is increasingly pitting the three branches of government against each other, with Congress and the judiciary struggling to assert power over officials with broad discretion to issue rules.
While Republican lawmakers have scored victories in the messaging battle over regulations, they say proponents of a more activist government are winning the war.
“We sit back and watch this erosion and watch, really, an executive branch that has, I think, arrogant powers of overseeing things,” Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.) told The Hill.
Taken separately, the public tends to support individual regulations.
A Gallup poll earlier this year found that 82 percent of Americans either believe the government is doing the right amount or needs to do more to protect the environment, while two-thirds say they would support stricter standards for food sold in public schools.
But critics, including industry groups and congressional Republicans, charge that the cumulative affect of the mounting red tape is crushing businesses.
“All the kinds of things we say we want: an expanding economy, more opportunity, more jobs — all of them are stifled by the regulatory oppression that’s occurred,” said Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.).
Obama has responded to business’s concerns with a regulatory “look-back” aimed at scrapping old rules on the books. Howard Shelanski, the administration’s regulatory chief, told Congress last month that the effort had turned up hundreds of regulatory reform proposals, just a few of which could save up to $10 billion.
But the process of getting rid of regulations is easier said than done, experts say.
CONTINUED: Regulation nation: Obama expands the regulatory state - The Hill's RegWatch
Showing posts with label Congressional Budget Office. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Congressional Budget Office. Show all posts
Monday, August 19, 2013
Friday, October 28, 2011
DAVID LIMBAUGH: Obama's Illusory Student Loan Scheme
With his latest pseudo-compassionate expansion of the student loan program, President Obama reminds us why we ask whether he is simply unable to learn from history or he is indifferent to government waste incurred in pursuit of "good intentions."
Back when Obama was trolling for illusory savings to manipulate Congressional Budget Office scorekeepers into decreeing that Obamacare would be revenue-neutral, he proposed the ingenious scheme whereby the federal government would subsume 100 percent of the student loan industry and eliminate evil private-sector profits going to "middlemen."
The plan was a smorgasbord for big-government enthusiasts because it envisioned whacking private business, legislative trickery and growing the government in numerous ways. It wouldn't just allow the government to seize financial business in grand fascist style; it also gave Obama an excuse to expand the existing loan program.
By calculating $60 billion in savings over the next decade, Obama gleefully inflated student loans by $40 billion and boasted that he still had $20 billion left over to count toward reconciling the balance sheet on his grossly over-budgeted national health care bill.
Obama smuggled this student loan legislation into the Obamacare bill because it probably never would have otherwise attracted the 60 needed votes to pass on its own. Such relatively small-potatoes legislation, by itself, wouldn't have supported the bribes Obama used to cram through Obamacare.
CONTINUE READING: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2011/10/28/limbaugh-obamas-illusory-student-loan-scheme/?subscriber=1
Back when Obama was trolling for illusory savings to manipulate Congressional Budget Office scorekeepers into decreeing that Obamacare would be revenue-neutral, he proposed the ingenious scheme whereby the federal government would subsume 100 percent of the student loan industry and eliminate evil private-sector profits going to "middlemen."
The plan was a smorgasbord for big-government enthusiasts because it envisioned whacking private business, legislative trickery and growing the government in numerous ways. It wouldn't just allow the government to seize financial business in grand fascist style; it also gave Obama an excuse to expand the existing loan program.
By calculating $60 billion in savings over the next decade, Obama gleefully inflated student loans by $40 billion and boasted that he still had $20 billion left over to count toward reconciling the balance sheet on his grossly over-budgeted national health care bill.
Obama smuggled this student loan legislation into the Obamacare bill because it probably never would have otherwise attracted the 60 needed votes to pass on its own. Such relatively small-potatoes legislation, by itself, wouldn't have supported the bribes Obama used to cram through Obamacare.
CONTINUE READING: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2011/10/28/limbaugh-obamas-illusory-student-loan-scheme/?subscriber=1
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Telegraph.co.uk
The midterms may have saved a superpower: Americans say no to US decline
Nile Gardiner
Tonight’s emphatic conservative House victory in the US midterms is a powerful rejection of President Obama’s handling of the economy and his Big Government agenda, including his controversial healthcare reform plans. The conservative revolution has been largely spurred by disenchantment with the federal government, and a strong belief in limited government, lower taxation, and reduced public spending, as well as a desire to return to America’s Founding principles.
It is also a powerful rejection of American decline, currently being fueled by massive debts at home, weakened defences and a defeatist foreign policy. The federal debt has jumped from 40 percent of GDP in 2008 to 62 percent by the end of this year, the highest percentage since World War Two.
As I noted several weeks ago, when I wrote of the consequences of an unchecked presidency acting with impunity:
Under the Obama White House, economic decline, feckless borrowing and towering debts, which will rise dramatically further if hugely expensive health care reforms are implemented, are combined with a flawed foreign policy and national security strategy which is leaving America weaker on the world stage and more vulnerable to attack. From its decision to scrap Third Site missile defences in eastern and central Europe, to its failed policy of engagement with Iran and its timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Obama presidency is projecting dangerous weakness and compromise in the face of its enemies.
Ultimately, President Obama’s legacy to America will be the decline of a great superpower, weighed down by crushing debts and massive entitlement programs, and facing an emboldened set of adversaries, from Moscow to Tehran to Pyongyang. The damage inflicted by the Obama administration will ultimately be worse than the harm caused by the presidency of Jimmy Carter due to the scale of the long-term economic crisis now facing America.
The overwhelming repudiation of the Obama administration’s failing policies sends a clear message to the world that the American people will not accept the decline of the world’s most powerful nation. Now the hard part begins, and a very top priority for the new Congress must be reigning in the ballooning national debt, which the Congressional Budget Office predicts could rise to 87 percent of GDP by 2020, 109 percent by 2025, and 185 percent of GDP by 2035.
While the Conservative-led government in Great Britain has already embarked upon a $130 billion austerity cuts package, shedding nearly 500,000 public sector jobs, the US administration has defiantly remained with its head in the sand, while still talking in terms of further stimulus spending. That position is unsustainable. Dramatic spending cuts (with the exception of national defence) must also be coupled with a pro-growth agenda of lower taxes, private sector job creation, free trade and economic freedom.
After the immense damage of the last two years, the midterms have offered the United States an opportunity to reverse course and get back on its feet. The world needs a powerful, successful, dynamic and prosperous America, where individual liberty and freedom are the driving forces, rather than the overbearing deadweight of federal government. The American people have spoken, and the White House must be held to account.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100061988/the-midterms-may-have-saved-a-superpower-americans-say-no-to-us-decline/
Nile Gardiner
Tonight’s emphatic conservative House victory in the US midterms is a powerful rejection of President Obama’s handling of the economy and his Big Government agenda, including his controversial healthcare reform plans. The conservative revolution has been largely spurred by disenchantment with the federal government, and a strong belief in limited government, lower taxation, and reduced public spending, as well as a desire to return to America’s Founding principles.
It is also a powerful rejection of American decline, currently being fueled by massive debts at home, weakened defences and a defeatist foreign policy. The federal debt has jumped from 40 percent of GDP in 2008 to 62 percent by the end of this year, the highest percentage since World War Two.
As I noted several weeks ago, when I wrote of the consequences of an unchecked presidency acting with impunity:
Under the Obama White House, economic decline, feckless borrowing and towering debts, which will rise dramatically further if hugely expensive health care reforms are implemented, are combined with a flawed foreign policy and national security strategy which is leaving America weaker on the world stage and more vulnerable to attack. From its decision to scrap Third Site missile defences in eastern and central Europe, to its failed policy of engagement with Iran and its timetable for withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Obama presidency is projecting dangerous weakness and compromise in the face of its enemies.
Ultimately, President Obama’s legacy to America will be the decline of a great superpower, weighed down by crushing debts and massive entitlement programs, and facing an emboldened set of adversaries, from Moscow to Tehran to Pyongyang. The damage inflicted by the Obama administration will ultimately be worse than the harm caused by the presidency of Jimmy Carter due to the scale of the long-term economic crisis now facing America.
The overwhelming repudiation of the Obama administration’s failing policies sends a clear message to the world that the American people will not accept the decline of the world’s most powerful nation. Now the hard part begins, and a very top priority for the new Congress must be reigning in the ballooning national debt, which the Congressional Budget Office predicts could rise to 87 percent of GDP by 2020, 109 percent by 2025, and 185 percent of GDP by 2035.
While the Conservative-led government in Great Britain has already embarked upon a $130 billion austerity cuts package, shedding nearly 500,000 public sector jobs, the US administration has defiantly remained with its head in the sand, while still talking in terms of further stimulus spending. That position is unsustainable. Dramatic spending cuts (with the exception of national defence) must also be coupled with a pro-growth agenda of lower taxes, private sector job creation, free trade and economic freedom.
After the immense damage of the last two years, the midterms have offered the United States an opportunity to reverse course and get back on its feet. The world needs a powerful, successful, dynamic and prosperous America, where individual liberty and freedom are the driving forces, rather than the overbearing deadweight of federal government. The American people have spoken, and the White House must be held to account.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100061988/the-midterms-may-have-saved-a-superpower-americans-say-no-to-us-decline/
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Chuck Norris
$200,000 for Capitol Hill Bottled Water?
The Congressional Budget Office just reported that in the past two years since President Barack Obama took office, federal spending is up 21.4 percent.
The national deficit was $1.29 trillion in 2010 (second to the $1.4 trillion in Obama's first year in office, 2009), which means that for every $1 the federal government spent this past year, it borrowed 37 cents of it!
The feds will tell you that their outrageous spending habits were necessary to pull our economy out of its recession. But would their same rationale justify the fact that the money Congress spends on itself has soared 89 percent over the past decade, more than three times the U.S. inflation rate?
It's true. In 2000, the feds spent $2.87 billion to run Capitol Hill. In fiscal year 2010, they almost doubled the amount, to an enormous $5.42 billion. From 2000-10, while inflation went up 26 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Capitol expenses went up 89 percent.
Were all those expenditures necessary to pull the economy out of a recession, too? Will the Obama administration again blame former President George W. Bush for its contemptible spending habits in its first two years?
According to Capitol News Connection and the congressional watchdog groups Sunlight Foundation and LegiStorm, here are just some of the itemized personnel costs of your legislative branch of government, including their comparative increases from 2000:
--Congress members' salaries and benefits: $126 million, up 23.5 percent.
--Expense allowances for Senate leaders: $180,000, up 99 percent.
--Senate officers: $178.98 million, up 99 percent.
--House leadership offices: $25.88 million, up 82 percent.
--Other House officers: $198.30 million, up 120 percent.
--Senators' personal offices: $422 million, up 75 percent.
--Representatives' personal offices: $660 million, up 62 percent.
--Architect of the Capitol salaries: $106.78 million, up 118 percent.
--Capitol Police salaries: $265.18 million, up 237 percent.
--Capitol Police general expenses: $63.13 million, up 860 percent.
Other items:
--Senate inquiries and investigations: $140.5 million, up 96 percent.
--Capitol grounds upkeep: $10.97 million, up 102 percent.
--Capitol building maintenance: $33.18 million (not listed separately in 2000).
--Senate office buildings: $74.39 million, up 16 percent.
--House office buildings: $100.46 million, up 169 percent.
--Capitol Visitor Center: $22.45 million (didn't exist in 2000).
--Congressional Budget Office: $45.16 million, up 72 percent.
--Government Accountability Office: $556.84 million, up 47 percent.
--Library of Congress: $446.15 million, up 73 percent.
--Congressional Research Service: $112.49 million, up 57 percent.
And if you don't think those costs are reflective of a nation in economic peril and government run amok, consider momentarily how critical these following costs are to running our country -- or are they?
--Since Democrat Nancy Pelosi took over the position of speaker of the House in January 2007, funding for her office soared 62 percent, from $2.9 million to $4.7 million. For a single office?!
--And taxpayers paid an enormous printing bill of $93.76 million, up 212 percent. (How many copies of the 1,000-plus-page Obamacare bill do you think that bought the feds? In a computer age of paperless transactions, don't you think they could save a few dollars here by learning what PDF files are?)
--According to the Sunlight Foundation, $4.28 million was spent on student loan repayments during the first quarter of this year as one of the congressional staff member employment perks.
--Pension costs continue to soar as congressional members enjoy the $60,000 annual benefit when they retire at age 62 after only having five years of congressional service. More than 400 former members receive average pensions of $60,000 a year.
--Taxpayers also forked out $3.27 million for Capitol Hill office supplies, as well as $628,332 for food. In addition, we spent $51.05 million on electricity and $4.63 million on sewer and water services in the Capitol building.
--And that water bill doesn't include the bottled water, which the House offices alone spent nearly $200,000 on during just the first quarter of 2010!
Friends, this next election fight is not for the weak at heart. Those elected next will either plummet our country into a fiscal abyss by maintaining the present course or deliver our economy from utter ruin by turning sharply to avoid economic disaster.
If our country is to survive, we must elect only those who show proof of fiscal discipline, refuse under all circumstances to increase our national deficit, disdain special interests, are willing to radically cut spending, and commit to pass and live under a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget. (Please join the movement to pressure Congress to do so, by signing BBA Now's petition for a Common Sense Balanced Budget Amendment. And for a voter guide detailing where candidates in your state stand on issues, go to http://www.christianvoterguide.com/.)
With the present elective battle at hand, I call upon the great battalion of patriots to get out and vote Nov. 2 in the same spirit in which George Washington admonished his army in 1776: "The hour is fast approaching, on which the Honor and Success of this army, and the safety of our bleeding Country depend. Remember officers and Soldiers, that you are Freemen, fighting for the blessings of Liberty -- that slavery will be your portion, and that of your posterity, if you do not acquit yourselves like men."
(I also encourage everyone to check out the trailers to two new patriotic films playing near you, "I Want Your Money" and "Battle for America.")
Chuck Norris is a columnist and impossible to kill.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Chuck Norris and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/10/26/$200,000_for_capitol_hill_bottled_water/page/1
The Congressional Budget Office just reported that in the past two years since President Barack Obama took office, federal spending is up 21.4 percent.
The national deficit was $1.29 trillion in 2010 (second to the $1.4 trillion in Obama's first year in office, 2009), which means that for every $1 the federal government spent this past year, it borrowed 37 cents of it!
The feds will tell you that their outrageous spending habits were necessary to pull our economy out of its recession. But would their same rationale justify the fact that the money Congress spends on itself has soared 89 percent over the past decade, more than three times the U.S. inflation rate?
It's true. In 2000, the feds spent $2.87 billion to run Capitol Hill. In fiscal year 2010, they almost doubled the amount, to an enormous $5.42 billion. From 2000-10, while inflation went up 26 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Capitol expenses went up 89 percent.
Were all those expenditures necessary to pull the economy out of a recession, too? Will the Obama administration again blame former President George W. Bush for its contemptible spending habits in its first two years?
According to Capitol News Connection and the congressional watchdog groups Sunlight Foundation and LegiStorm, here are just some of the itemized personnel costs of your legislative branch of government, including their comparative increases from 2000:
--Congress members' salaries and benefits: $126 million, up 23.5 percent.
--Expense allowances for Senate leaders: $180,000, up 99 percent.
--Senate officers: $178.98 million, up 99 percent.
--House leadership offices: $25.88 million, up 82 percent.
--Other House officers: $198.30 million, up 120 percent.
--Senators' personal offices: $422 million, up 75 percent.
--Representatives' personal offices: $660 million, up 62 percent.
--Architect of the Capitol salaries: $106.78 million, up 118 percent.
--Capitol Police salaries: $265.18 million, up 237 percent.
--Capitol Police general expenses: $63.13 million, up 860 percent.
Other items:
--Senate inquiries and investigations: $140.5 million, up 96 percent.
--Capitol grounds upkeep: $10.97 million, up 102 percent.
--Capitol building maintenance: $33.18 million (not listed separately in 2000).
--Senate office buildings: $74.39 million, up 16 percent.
--House office buildings: $100.46 million, up 169 percent.
--Capitol Visitor Center: $22.45 million (didn't exist in 2000).
--Congressional Budget Office: $45.16 million, up 72 percent.
--Government Accountability Office: $556.84 million, up 47 percent.
--Library of Congress: $446.15 million, up 73 percent.
--Congressional Research Service: $112.49 million, up 57 percent.
And if you don't think those costs are reflective of a nation in economic peril and government run amok, consider momentarily how critical these following costs are to running our country -- or are they?
--Since Democrat Nancy Pelosi took over the position of speaker of the House in January 2007, funding for her office soared 62 percent, from $2.9 million to $4.7 million. For a single office?!
--And taxpayers paid an enormous printing bill of $93.76 million, up 212 percent. (How many copies of the 1,000-plus-page Obamacare bill do you think that bought the feds? In a computer age of paperless transactions, don't you think they could save a few dollars here by learning what PDF files are?)
--According to the Sunlight Foundation, $4.28 million was spent on student loan repayments during the first quarter of this year as one of the congressional staff member employment perks.
--Pension costs continue to soar as congressional members enjoy the $60,000 annual benefit when they retire at age 62 after only having five years of congressional service. More than 400 former members receive average pensions of $60,000 a year.
--Taxpayers also forked out $3.27 million for Capitol Hill office supplies, as well as $628,332 for food. In addition, we spent $51.05 million on electricity and $4.63 million on sewer and water services in the Capitol building.
--And that water bill doesn't include the bottled water, which the House offices alone spent nearly $200,000 on during just the first quarter of 2010!
Friends, this next election fight is not for the weak at heart. Those elected next will either plummet our country into a fiscal abyss by maintaining the present course or deliver our economy from utter ruin by turning sharply to avoid economic disaster.
If our country is to survive, we must elect only those who show proof of fiscal discipline, refuse under all circumstances to increase our national deficit, disdain special interests, are willing to radically cut spending, and commit to pass and live under a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget. (Please join the movement to pressure Congress to do so, by signing BBA Now's petition for a Common Sense Balanced Budget Amendment. And for a voter guide detailing where candidates in your state stand on issues, go to http://www.christianvoterguide.com/.)
With the present elective battle at hand, I call upon the great battalion of patriots to get out and vote Nov. 2 in the same spirit in which George Washington admonished his army in 1776: "The hour is fast approaching, on which the Honor and Success of this army, and the safety of our bleeding Country depend. Remember officers and Soldiers, that you are Freemen, fighting for the blessings of Liberty -- that slavery will be your portion, and that of your posterity, if you do not acquit yourselves like men."
(I also encourage everyone to check out the trailers to two new patriotic films playing near you, "I Want Your Money" and "Battle for America.")
Chuck Norris is a columnist and impossible to kill.
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Chuck Norris and Townhall.com's daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/10/26/$200,000_for_capitol_hill_bottled_water/page/1
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Daily Policy Digest: Economic Issues
Third-Rail Economics
September 14, 2010
The cost of entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security is racing ahead at the same time that the federal government is ladling out dollars to fight the recession. Meanwhile, we are contending with chronically high unemployment, insurmountable debt payments and a crushing tax burden that could kill U.S. competitiveness. Maybe, just maybe, those entitlements have to be redesigned, says Congressman Paul Ryan.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that federal debt will, by 2020, rise to nearly 100 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) -- compared with 62 percent today and 36 percent only three years ago -- if the Bush tax cuts are extended, the alternative minimum tax is indexed for inflation and current spending policies remain in place. According to the Social Security Board of Trustees, by 2037 the program's trust funds will be depleted, says Forbes.
To keep that from happening, Ryan proposes to freeze nondefense discretionary spending -- 15 percent of the budget -- for 10 years and move to means-tested programs to cover retirees and sick people.
Ryan's tax plan would eliminate itemized deductions and set rates at 10 percent for the first $50,000 of income on an individual return and 25 percent for income above that.
He would replace the corporate income tax with an 8.5 percent business consumption tax.
Other proposals by Ryan include:
Wiping out ObamaCare and replacing it with a voucher-based system in which adults get a $2,300 refundable tax credit to pay for health care.
Similarly, Medicare recipients under age 55 today would, on retirement, get vouchers to buy private insurance.
He would also raise the eligibility age for both Social Security and Medicare to 69 and 70, respectively, by the end of this century.
Source: Brian Wingfield, "Third-Rail Economics," Forbes Magazine, September 13, 2010.
For text:
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0913/outfront-economy-taxes-obama-ryan-third-rail-economics.html
For Ryan's report:
http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Roadmap2Final2.pdf
For more on Economic Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17
September 14, 2010
The cost of entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security is racing ahead at the same time that the federal government is ladling out dollars to fight the recession. Meanwhile, we are contending with chronically high unemployment, insurmountable debt payments and a crushing tax burden that could kill U.S. competitiveness. Maybe, just maybe, those entitlements have to be redesigned, says Congressman Paul Ryan.
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that federal debt will, by 2020, rise to nearly 100 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) -- compared with 62 percent today and 36 percent only three years ago -- if the Bush tax cuts are extended, the alternative minimum tax is indexed for inflation and current spending policies remain in place. According to the Social Security Board of Trustees, by 2037 the program's trust funds will be depleted, says Forbes.
To keep that from happening, Ryan proposes to freeze nondefense discretionary spending -- 15 percent of the budget -- for 10 years and move to means-tested programs to cover retirees and sick people.
Ryan's tax plan would eliminate itemized deductions and set rates at 10 percent for the first $50,000 of income on an individual return and 25 percent for income above that.
He would replace the corporate income tax with an 8.5 percent business consumption tax.
Other proposals by Ryan include:
Wiping out ObamaCare and replacing it with a voucher-based system in which adults get a $2,300 refundable tax credit to pay for health care.
Similarly, Medicare recipients under age 55 today would, on retirement, get vouchers to buy private insurance.
He would also raise the eligibility age for both Social Security and Medicare to 69 and 70, respectively, by the end of this century.
Source: Brian Wingfield, "Third-Rail Economics," Forbes Magazine, September 13, 2010.
For text:
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0913/outfront-economy-taxes-obama-ryan-third-rail-economics.html
For Ryan's report:
http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Roadmap2Final2.pdf
For more on Economic Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_Category=17
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
