In an interview with CFIF, Lance Brown, Executive Director of Partnership for Affordable Clean Energy, discusses the EPA’s misguided attempt to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, the costs associated with the recent proposal and why President Obama is wrong in suggesting that reducing carbon will prevent asthma or heart attacks.
Listen to the interview here.
Below is one of the latest cartoons from two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.
View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.
“The number of jobs requiring medium levels of skill has shrunk, while the number at both ends of the distribution – those requiring high and low skill levels – has expanded,” says a new research report from the Dallas Federal Reserve.
This employment polarization is changing the standard of living for those in the middle class since, “The number of people performing low-skill, low-pay, manual labor has grown along with the number undertaking high-skill, high-pay, non-routine, principally problem-solving jobs.”
Moving to the wealthier pole requires adapting to non-routine cognitive work since computer automation and off-shoring makes jobs such as “brokers, clerks, tellers, cashiers, telemarketers, title examiners, bookkeepers, insurance underwriters, travel agents and technicians” increasingly irrelevant.
This is sobering news for those aspiring to middle class status. There was a time when a college degree qualified a person’s cognitive abilities, and working according to a companywide routine virtually guaranteed a middle class lifestyle. That time is past. Going forward the likelihood that a person will escape the perils of low-income will depend greatly on her ability to be increasingly entrepreneurial in every facet of her work; whether as a full-time employee or independent contractor.
It’s a reality many formerly comfortable middle class workers would like to avoid. But with computing power and automation spreading quickly everywhere, it looks like the only option available.
Welcome to the brave new job market.
By now you’ve probably heard about the scandal surrounding the Obama administration’s deal to free five Taliban officials held at Guantanamo Bay for what increasingly looks like a deserter from the U.S. Army stationed in Afghanistan.
Those in the mainstream media defending the move – including a Daily Beast columnist who tweeted, “What’s the argument that these five Taliban guys are so dangerous? Are they ninjas? Do they have superpowers?” – would do well to remember how the Taliban’s members earned their cells at Gitmo.
The five released prisoners “were top officials in the Taliban regime: a provincial governor, a deputy defense minister, a deputy intelligence minister, a top arms smuggler, and a top Taliban military commander. Two of them are wanted by the United Nations for war crimes committed against Afghanistan’s Shiites,” writes Robert Tracinski.
Tracinski then gives a sampling of what these kinds of Taliban officials do:
America can’t right every wrong in the world, but surely it should be counted on to keep the world safe from criminals in its custody. Freeing five prisoners so they can rejoin the ranks of a known terrorist organization is a deplorable dereliction of duty. If any of these men go on to commit more crimes, those who agreed to their release will share the blame.
“All veterans on waiting lists should be able to easily access care outside the VA without waiting for a potentially corrupt facility to approve their request,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) writes today in a letter to President Barack Obama. “Our veterans should not be left in limbo, relying on what your own audit acknowledges is a ‘systematic lack of integrity within some Veterans Health Administration facilities.’”
As an immediate remedy Boehner calls on Obama to support legislation coming from the House Veterans Affairs Committee that would allow “any veteran unable to obtain an appointment within 30 days the option to receive non-VA care.”
If the president and his congressional allies have a better alternative they better put it forward. Too many veterans are waiting.
Recently, Yuval Levin wrote a characteristically sober and insightful post about the structural problems afflicting not just the Veterans Affairs hospital system, but the VA itself.
Amid other obstacles to reform, Levin explains why certain veterans groups share some of the blame for the VA’s managerial mess.
It is impossible to overstate the political power of the veterans’ interest groups over the VA. The simplest way to describe it is that they get everything they want, period. There are many powerful interest groups in Washington, but because their domain is carefully limited and politically and culturally sensitive, the vets’ groups have a kind of command of their arena that I don’t think any other sort of interest group approaches. And this is a big part of the reason why the VA is so dysfunctional, because it is not subject to congressional or administrative oversight in the usual sense. It answers fundamentally to the vets’ groups. They often informally review its annual budget request before it goes to OMB. They are uniquely involved in drafting budgets on the congressional side. They are considered a necessary signoff on every major decision. Their firm opposition to something is the end of the story. Their priorities are the VA’s priorities. And yet they are very well positioned to treat failures that result from their own distorting power over the system as reasons to increase their power.
Every successful interest group enjoys a certain amount of leverage to get what it wants, but the power exercised by veterans’ organizations that Levin describes is itself a scandal in need of reform. Somewhere the public’s commitment to serve those who served all got hijacked by lobbyists imposing policy choices that are clearly having deleterious effects on retired and disabled veterans. Any reform of the VA department needs to include whatever measures are necessary to uproot this latest case of regulatory capture.
Join CFIF Corporate Counsel and Senior Vice President Renee Giachino today from 4:00 p.m. CDT to 6:00 p.m. CDT (that’s 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. EDT) on Northwest Florida’s 1330 AM WEBY, as she hosts her radio show, “Your Turn: Meeting Nonsense with Commonsense.” Today’s guest lineup includes:
4:00 CDT/5:00 pm EDT — Daren Bakst, Research Fellow in Agricultural Policy, Heritage Foundation: New School Lunch Requirements and Michelle Obama;
4:15 CDT/5:15 pm EDT — Megan L. Brown, Parnter, Wiley Rein LLP, Washington, D.C.: Supreme Court Round-Up;
4:30 CDT/5:30 pm EDT — Erin Murphy, Parnter, Bancroft PLLC, Washington, D.C.: McCutcheon v. FEC;
4:45 CDT/5:45 pm EDT — Paul Kersey, Director of Labor Policy, Illinois Policy Institute: Unions and Home Healthcare Givers;
5:00 CST/6:00 pm EDT — Guest T.B.A.: Obama Administration, Air Pollution and Global Warming; and
5:30 CDT/6:30 pm EDT — Timothy Lee, Senior Vice President, Legal and Public Affairs, CFIF: Net Neutrality.
Listen live on the Internet here. Call in to share your comments or ask questions of today’s guests at (850) 623-1330.
I wrote here last week that I was ambivalent as to whether Eric Shinseki should lose his job as Secretary of Veterans Affairs over the scandal involving VA hospitals. My reluctance owed not to any doubts about the gravity of the scandal — it’s utterly horrible — but to a long-held belief that firings should be targeted at the person most directly responsible for error. My feeling was that only if Shinseki either (A) was that person or (B) had knowingly enabled that person, he wasn’t necessarily the right person to get the axe. And, as I noted last week, it seems clear to me that the real problem at the VA has a lot more to do with the structure of the institution and the policies it employs than the management (though it’s utterly plausible that Shinseki wasn’t the right guy to address those deeper issues).
It’s all moot now, of course, as Shinseki’s resignation was announced this morning. This was probably for the best. If anything, I came to lean more towards thinking his departure was the right thing over the last week — not because of the underlying scandal but because Shinseki’s reaction to this outrage seemed muted almost to the point of drowsiness.
It’s nice to see someone in the Obama Administration finally be held responsible for failures (no doubt Kathleen Sebelius’s management of the ObamaCare rollout had a lot to do with her departure, but she was still allowed to leave on her own terms). That said, however, no one should be sanguine about what lies ahead. Sacrificing Shinseki to the media gods may have bought the Obama Administration some time, but it doesn’t solve any of the underlying structural problems at the VA.
One of the reasons that the VA scandal has had so much traction is that it’s utterly non-partisan. Everyone believes government should be doing everything in its power to assist those who’ve worn the uniform of their country. With that in mind, this would be a good time for President Obama to do something truly presidential and look for the best man for the job regardless of political affiliations. What he needs is a proven fixer, someone who can turn around a major organization and root out inefficiencies and rot throughout the system; someone who will do the job as a service to the country rather than as a stepping stone to greater visibility; someone who’ll take the charge seriously even after the story has dropped off the front pages.
There’s a guy out there who’s a perfect fit for this job. Barack Obama ran against him in 2012.
Copyright infringement constitutes a multi-billion dollar problem, but free market cooperation in the form of the Copyright Alert System (CAS) has enjoyed a remarkably successful first year.
One year ago, a broad coalition of private enterprises, such as entertainment and telecommunications companies, launched CAS to proactively inform consumers of infringing activity detected involving their account. That approach derived from the knowledge that large majorities of consumers (a) agree that it is never appropriate to engage in copyright infringement, (b) are often unaware as to which online sources are illegal, and (c) stated that they would immediately discontinue participating in copyright infringement immediately if they were alerted to it.
With that in mind, here’s how CAS works. It involves three levels of alerts – the educational stage, the acknowledgement stage and the mitigation stage – with each stage including two alerts before moving to the next stage. The educational stage informs users that infringing activity has occurred with their account, identifies the specific content at issue, sets forth steps to avoid further infringement and provides alternative legal sources for the content. Then, if the infringement continues on that account, the acknowledgement stage involves up to two alerts requiring the user to acknowledge that they’ve received the alert (but does not require the user to admit or deny wrongdoing). Finally, if the infringement continues, the user receives up to two mitigation alerts, which can involve temporary reduction in Internet speeds, temporary downgrades in Internet service tier or redirection to a landing page for a set period of time until the account holder has reviewed copyright education materials.
One year in, the results are impressive. Most prominently, the system succeeded in stopping the alerted activity before reaching the final mitigation stage:
We can report that during the first ten months of CAS’s operation, more than 2 million notices of alleged infringement were sent to ISPs and more than 1.3 million Alerts were sent to 722,820 customer accounts. The vast majority of those Alerts were Educational Alerts (72%), while a very small fraction were Mitigation Alerts (8%), with less than 3% at the final (or second) Mitigation level.”
The system’s success is further illustrated by the fact that very few – just 0.27% – of the alerts eligible for review were actually challenged. And among that small number of actual challenges, some 77% were upheld as valid.
Simply put, after one year CAS has established a record of success based upon a model of market cooperation. That obviously does not mean that continued and even additional law enforcement avenues to combat copyright infringement and online piracy aren’t necessary. But it does provide encouraging news in this important ongoing concern.
Senik: Mind the Gap: The Dangerous Distance Between Civilians and the Military
Lee: New ObamaCare Fissures Emerge, as Stunned Labor Unions Chafe at Higher Costs
Ellis: Is Indiana Governor Mike Pence Falling into ObamaCare’s Medicaid Trap?
Video: The Freedom to Criticize Government
Podcast: The Radical Environmentalist War on Private Property
Jester’s Courtroom: A Prayer for Relief from Ridiculous Lawsuit
Editorial Cartoons: Latest Cartoons of Michael Ramirez
Quiz: Question of the Week
Notable Quotes: Quotes of the Week
If you are not already signed up to receive CFIF’s Liberty Update by e-mail, sign up here.
President Obama’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC), bowing to the demands of liberal special interests, is actually considering a scheme to regulate the Internet like a public utility. And if they get their way, this egregious government overreach into the broadband economy will almost certainly kill job creation, harm consumers and bring a significant amount of investment and innovation to a screeching halt.
Simply put, the federal government micromanaging the Internet under Title II of the Telecommunications Act is a dangerous scheme, one that Congress must halt and the FCC must abandon. That’s why the Center for Individual Freedom this week activated StopNetRegulation.org, a project dedicated to ensuring the Internet remains free from heavy-handed government regulations and stopping this latest power grab by the Obama administration.
Join the fight by visiting StopNetRegulation.org. While there, use the web form to quickly and easily contact your Members of Congress and the FCC.
In this week’s Freedom Minute, CFIF’s Renee Giachino discusses the latest push by Congressional Democrats to amend the U.S. Constitution to grant Congress the power to further stifle political speech.
In an interview with CFIF, Marita Noon, Executive Director of Energy Makes America Great, discusses the latest dubious efforts by extreme environmentalists to keep private property owners from selling, developing or using their land.
Listen to the interview here.
Below is one of the latest cartoons from two-time Pulitzer Prize-winner Michael Ramirez.
View more of Michael Ramirez’s cartoons on CFIF’s website here.
It’s been a tough two years for outgoing Texas Republican Lt. Governor David Dewhurst. First, he lost a bitter U.S. Senate primary fight to Ted Cruz in 2012, and yesterday he was blown out 64-36 percent in a run-off election to maintain his current job. After more than a decade in statewide office, the multi-millionaire Dewhurst is out on the political streets.
None of this was inevitable. Dewhurst was an early favorite in his matchups with Cruz and Patrick; the latter currently serving as a State Senator and formerly as a conservative radio show host. Not long ago Dewhurst was trying to shore up his conservative bona fides by shepherding a Voter ID law over strenuous objections from Democrats. However, even that wasn’t enough to overcome his past support for in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants and other moderate tendencies.
When Ted Cruz challenged Dewhurst for the Senate it was said that the standards for conservatives had to be higher in Texas than most other states. Dan Patrick is perhaps the most outspoken elected conservative in Texas politics right now, with a clear path to becoming one of the most powerful political figures in the state.
In two years, Texas Republicans have selected two deeply committed conservatives to important offices with national reach. Time will tell if Cruz and Patrick make good on their opportunities.
An article at the website Accounting Today starts with the headline, “ObamaCare Weighing Less on Hiring Plans.” In it, the author analyzes new poll results asking accountants who work with small businesses how the health law is impacting their hiring practices.
Last year, an identical poll found that 66 percent of small businesses said ObamaCare made it less likely they would hire new employees. This year’s survey reported a drop to 54 percent.
This is great news, according to the firm that commissioned the poll. “[W]hile planning for the Affordable Care Act is still impacting many businesses’ plans for hiring, it is causing significantly fewer businesses to slow hiring in the coming year in comparison to last year, which is positive.”
It would be more accurate to say, “less negative.”
Imagine the euphoria if ObamaCare wasn’t a factor at all. That would allow 54 percent of small businesses to base hiring decisions on opportunities to win market share. Instead, a stout majority are holding tight on their headcount because they can’t afford ObamaCare’s increased compliance costs.
Going forward, we’re likely to see more poll numbers and reporting like this that makes it seem like ObamaCare’s influence on economic growth is diminishing, when in fact businesses have already absorbed the initial hit that comes with ObamaCare, and have fundamentally changed their operations.
There is a ‘new normal’ of less full-time jobs, more part-timers and an increasing reliance on independent contractors. Dramatic year-to-year changes are likely to diminish over time as employers factor in ObamaCare’s increased labor costs and staff accordingly.
The real story here isn’t how many businesses will hire less people because of ObamaCare; it is how many jobs are not being created because of ObamaCare.
CFIF’s Renee Giachino discusses the national scandal engulfing the Veterans Administration (“VA”), the systemic dysfunction that plagues the VA, and the need for meaningful and comprehensive reform of a system that has failed to adequately serve our veterans and their families with the respect and service they deserve.
Lee: “Net Neutrality” and “Title II”: A Brief Primer on Two Dangerous Ideas
Senik: Yes, the VA Is a Real Scandal; No, Obama Won’t Do Anything About It
Ellis: How to Calculate Your ObamaCare HIT (Health Insurance Tax)
Podcast: Boko Haram: Terrorism in Nigeria
Jester’s Courtroom: This Lawsuit is Priceless
Editorial Cartoons: Latest Cartoons of Michael Ramirez
Quiz: Question of the Week
Notable Quotes: Quotes of the Week
If you are not already signed up to receive CFIF’s Liberty Update by e-mail, sign up here.
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service said Thursday it would start over on its controversial rule limiting the political activity of certain tax-exempt groups, propose a new rule that would take into account a backlash of opposition.
The announcement made official what IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told USA TODAY last month — that the IRS would put out a new proposal and seek more public comments before overturning a 57-year-old precedent allowing certain tax-exempt groups to engage in limited amounts of political activity.
Great news, though, alas, it sounds like the IRS will come back for another bite at this apple. Still, this buys time for those who believe that this entire endeavor is a misbegotten exercise in letting government narrow the parameters of political engagement.
There are few threats to freedom as great as allowing those in power to control what those out of power — which may be liberals one year and conservatives the next —can do or say about politics. Any truly ‘liberal’ society gives the opposition room to flower. May the IRS never complete this exercise.
In an interview with CFIF, Caitlin Poling, Director of Government Relations at the Foreign Policy Initiative, discusses terrorism in Africa, the kidnapping situation in Nigeria and why in 2012 then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton decided Boko Haram did not warrant a foreign terrorist organization designation.
Listen to the interview here.
 CFIF Freedom Line Blog RSS Feed CFIF on X CFIF on YouTube |
