Oil and Gas Production Brings Energy Independence

Just do most politicians think is energy independence? From what I have seen over the last several decades it means what energy source will bring them campaign funds or what energy source they support will help them get reelected. It seems it has nothing to do with what works and what doesn't.

Remember Hillary Clinton saying during her run for president that we need to be energy independent but she said we can't rely on oil or gas production to get the job done as it contributed to destroying the environment.

That was back in 2008 or earlier but no mind, it's sill good today as the progressive socialist still are head long into killing off natural gas 'fracking' which is producing trillion of cubic feet of gas and oil for our country, from private lands, and shale oil production up by millions of  barrels from just a few years ago, is polluting our land so it has to stop.

Did it every occur to you just what is the agenda of the progressive socialist liberal Democrats?

Gushing about America's Energy Future
December 13, 2012
Source: Desmond Lachman, "Gushing about America's Energy Future," American Enterprise Institute, December 3, 2012.

The United States is on the path to becoming energy independent in the next few decades. Indeed, the International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that U.S. oil production will exceed Saudi Arabia's production by 2020. It further projects that the United States will be energy independent by 2035, says Desmond Lachman, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

• Since 2008, U.S. oil production has increased around 25 percent.
• Because of this, oil imports only make up 42 percent of overall oil consumption, compared to 60 percent in 2005.
• The United States is expected to increase oil production to over 11 million barrels a day by 2020.
• As a result, oil imports will decline to 4 million a day.

Natural gas has also been a heavy component of the United States' path to energy independence.

• The United States has overtaken Russia as the world's largest natural gas producer.
• In less than a decade, shale gas production has gone from 2 percent of natural gas production to 37 percent.

The trend toward energy independence can be attributed to major advancements in drilling techniques and increases in fuel economy. The catalyst in these developments was not the federal government, but rather the free market. The free market incentivized innovations such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing.

These new methods have created the ability to tap into vast reserves of oil and natural gas that were not available before. As a result, prices for oil and natural gas have gone down.

There are several economic benefits that the United States enjoys as a result of moving toward energy independence.

• Around 1.7 million oil and gas jobs have been created in the energy sector.
• By 2020, we could expect 3 million new jobs.
• The U.S. trade deficit could be narrowed as natural gas exports increase and oil imports decline.
• Cutting oil imports by 6 million barrels per day by 2020, as the IEA projects, would save the United States about $180 billion a year.
• Furthermore, U.S. manufacturing would be revived.

Moreover, the United States would gain significant geopolitical advantages. For example, it would lower the influence of the Middle East. In addition, the United States would be in a position to challenge Russia's influence in Europe by providing some competition in supplying natural gas.

Wind Power Energy Sudside : Corrupted Welfare

Government interference is a guarantee of failure in nearly all circumstances. The wind  industry is a good example as it has proven to be no more then a waste of tax dollars but a great source of kick backs to the politicians campaigns.

When you add in Ethanol and solar, one can just imagine the billions of dollars that could have been used so much wiser. But then, where would the politicians get their funds and votes? Stealing from the taxpayers is now accepted as the 'new norm'. Just remember who voted for more of the same last November.

The Wind Production Tax Credit: Corporate Welfare at Its Worst
January 2, 2013
Source: Bonner R. Cohen, "The Wind Production Tax Credit: Corporate Welfare at its Worst," National Center for Public Policy Research, December 2012.

For 20 years, the wind-energy industry has been the beneficiary of a federal subsidy called the Production Tax Credit (PTC). Designed to promote wind power as part of an overall strategy to boost "renewable" energy, the PTC provides producers a tax credit of 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour of electricity generated.

What began as a temporary helping hand to enable wind power to compete with traditional sources of energy has become a permanent fixture of the wind industry's business model. The PTC has faced expiration six times since it was enacted in 1992, only to be extended by Congress under pressure from the wind industry and advocates of renewable energy, says Bonner R. Cohen, a senior fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research.

The 20-year-old subsidy to the wind industry should be allowed to expire and here are the reasons why:

• The wind industry does not need the PTC in order to survive.
• The PTC places an unacceptable burden on wind-poor states and states with no renewable-energy mandates.
• The PTC undermines and distorts price signals in the wholesale electricity market by giving wind producers an incentive to sell electricity at a loss to earn enormous tax subsidies.
• Even with taxpayer subsidies, wind is, and always will be, an intermittent and unreliable source of energy.
• With $16 trillion in debt and rising, the United States cannot afford to continue propping up a non-competitive, unreliable source of energy.

Wind Power A Sudsidized Failure : Market Forces Work

Free market forces will dictate just what is going to work and what is a waste of money. This is a great article in that is points out where and when wind power works and when it doesn't. For the most part it is a waste of money as long as it is subsides by the government.

What a revelation. When market forces are allowed to work, green energy has a place in the mix. subsidesed

The Failure of Wind Power
December 11, 2012
Source: Kevin D. Williamson, "Deval-used Wind Power," National Review Online, December 3, 2012.

Some politicians, like Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, are very ambitious about the role of alternative energy in electricity generation. His goal for the state is to produce 2,000 megawatts of power from alternative energy sources by 2020, says Kevin D. Williamson of the National Review.
Patrick expects wind power to be a major alternative source. However, as the general manager of the local utility authority in Princeton, Mass., describes, many wind-energy projects are failures.

• Princeton Municipal Light Department's wind-energy project has lost nearly $2 million.
• Customers of this utility company pay more in their electricity bill than the average customer -- totaling nearly $744,000 in 2011.
• Moreover, the general manager projects the project to lose $600,000 a year.

The projected yearly losses don't assume changes in wholesale electricity rates or repair costs, which can be extravagant.

• Original warranties on turbines have expired and extended warranty options are not available.
• This is problematic considering that the cost of replacing a gearbox, for instance, is estimated at $600,000.
• About $40 billion worth of wind turbines will go out of warranty by the end of 2012.

Additionally, wind turbines are out of commission more than 20 percent of the time -- only 0.5 percent of that time accounts for regularly scheduled maintenance. This makes it difficult for companies to produce cheap energy to consumers.

On top of the costs of utility losses and the price of subsidies, companies forgo investments in more economically viable projects. Rather than have the government provide incentives for certain ventures, market forces can direct companies and public officials to make sound investments. For example, agricultural and industrial users have more to gain from wind-energy projects than municipal utilities.

In some cases, wind energy has proven an economical investment. Valero installed a massive wind farm at its refinery in Texas that generates enough electricity for the entire complex. Furthermore, equipment used to run Marcellus Shale gas runs off solar power. In both cases, the firms were willing to invest in the alternative energy because it was economical, not because the government provided incentives.

Economists & Politicians Predict Positive Outcomes : What?

I'm confused - with the potential of a European collapse and another down grade to the credit rating of the United Sates possible, how can the talking heads believe that the economy and over all situation will improve dramatically in 2013?

The housing market is still burden with under water mortgages, banks still have a huge inventory of foreclosures that they haven't unloaded, foreign markets are headed to a sever slow down that depend on the Euro, China is headed to a currency shift and a slow down in market expansion as well as a huge problem with pollution which will effect it's work force with health problems.

Americans are in a state of confusion as well, they are divided between what they know to be reality, a reality that they are actually living, low wages rates, higher taxes, costly health care, rising energy and food costs and a future that promises little or now change.

The new reality they see on television, coming from Washington and the progressive media, spells out only doom and gloom for the next four years at least. How can the average citizen make plans for the future if they believe their personal existence is under attack from the forces in Washington that wants to control all aspect of their lives?

Some of the confusion comes with the new sources of information. In the past, with only the major networks as news sources explaining what is happening with the economy and the world, the average citizen had no choice but to believe what the major media outlets told them. Now, with alternative media outlets, everything has changed. All of a sudden the average citizen finds that what they have been told for decades might not be the truth but managed news to project an agenda that is counter to what a majority of the population believes.

Little wonder then why the population is in flux - an economy faltering but some say it's actually on the rise, our religious beliefs under attack from many sources, environmentalists demanding we are destroying the planet and completely change the way we live our lives, but new revelations from many sources say this is not so and prove it with statements from the very sources that the environmentalist use to support their agenda and a foreign policy that runs counter to what has made this country great for the last two centuries are only a few of the reasons that divide us so dramatically.

What is a person suppose to believe as the best course of action for the future when everything that we once believed to be true suddenly has come under attack? Not to worry, this is America and we not like any other country on earth. We know what to do. What we have to do is convince others all is not lost and fight on. 

What I know to be the truth is we are living in the greatest country on earth, and the people that built it are still among us today. It's their spirit and power, and the will of God, to survive in a wilderness that will pull us through. A spirit that will never give up but will find a way to rebuild our country with renewed energy and resourcefulness. We must believe in what we know to be the truth or we will surely parish. 

Another Ho-Hum Year for the Economy Likely in 2013
January 4, 2013
Source: Kevin G. Hall, "Another Ho-Hum Year for the Economy Likely in 2013," McClatchy, December 31,

For the third year in a row, economists are only slightly more optimistic about the prospects for economic growth and hiring, says McClatchy.

• The Federal Reserve expected growth between 2.3 percent to 3 percent in its December 12 New Year forecast.
• However, it now expects 2012 to close with annual growth no better than 1.8 percent.

Several factors, including ongoing debt problems in Europe, unsteady growth in developing nations and political uncertainty in the United States, all add to the cautious optimism about the economy. In addition, many lawmakers have expressed interest in revamping the tax code, which may add to the uncertainty.

As a result, many individuals and businesses have sidelined investments. In addition, many companies have halted hiring new employees.

There is some good news. Many economists expect 2013 to begin with modest growth but then accelerate as the year ends. Furthermore, stocks are likely to go up even if there is slow growth.

• Through December 27, the Dow was up 7.2 percent for 2012.
• Additionally, the S&P 500 was up 12.8 percent.
• In general, stocks should return 9 percent to 16 percent on investment.

In addition, the housing market is also projected to perform well this year. There have been gains in new and existing homes across several regions in the country. And if the housing market performs well, the overall U.S. economy will see above-trend growth.

Global equity markets will continue to perform as they have in 2013. The biggest dangers in the following year are potential geopolitical conflicts because of the impact they can have on U.S. corporations. For example, rising Middle East tensions and conflicts in the South China Sea can impact trade and production of many vital goods and services.
Source: Kevin G. Hall, "Another Ho-Hum Year for the Economy Likely in 2013," McClatchy, December 31,

Progessiveism, Socialism, Democracy : Freedom? Liberty?

This is an interesting note from the past. Here is someone that understands Republicans as ready to cave on any subject if it means being excluded. It seems Republicans haven't changed much over the years as we are watching the same nightmare unfolding now in our congress and many parts of our country. A prime example is California.

It's understandable that the members of congress that profess their beliefs in the Constitution as being the law of the land, and when they come under attack for those beliefs in the media, want only to be seen as good Americans, not some sort of deviant from the new 'norm'. The new 'norm', as understood by nearly half of the voting public and almost the entire media, is toward a form of Marxist socialism, that is, progressive liberal socialism. A Democratic socialism like found in Europe only more so, one further to the left of socialist Europe.

The only saving grace here is Conservatives are becoming the target now but they aren't caving under the pressure. The progressive socialist understands if the Conservative agenda of personal freedom and liberty is allowed to become the new 'norm', as it was for the last 220 years, the last ten years have had a decided shift to the far left, all is lost to fundamentally changing the country.


Joseph Schumpeter in "Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy," 1942:

Perhaps the most striking feature of the picture is the extent to which the bourgeoisie, besides educating its own enemies, allows itself in turn to be educated by them. It absorbs the slogans of current radicalism and seems quite willing to undergo a process of conversion to a creed hostile to its very existence.

Haltingly and grudgingly it concedes in part the implications of that creed. This would be most astonishing & indeed very hard to explain were it not for the fact that the typical bourgeois is rapidly losing faith in his own creed. This is verified by the very characteristic manner in which particular capitalist interests and bourgeoisie as a whole behave when facing direct attack.

They talk and plead—or hire people to do it for them; they snatch at every chance of compromise; they are ever ready to give in; they never put up a fight under the flag of their own ideals and interests—in this country [the U.S.] there was no real resistance anywhere against the imposition of crushing financial burdens during the last decade [the 1930s] or against labor legislation incompatible with the effective management of industry. . . .

Means of defense were not entirely lacking and history is full of examples of the success of small groups who, believing in their cause, were resolved to stand by their guns.

The only explanation for the meekness we observe is that the bourgeois order no longer makes any sense to the bourgeoisie itself and that, when all is said and nothing is done, it does not really care.

A version of this article appeared January 4, 2013 , on page A13 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Notable & Quotable.

Obama Voters Are So Happy : Why?

Did you ever wonder why so many people think Obama is doing a good job as president? Remember the history of the French queen that told her people that were starving to 'let them eat cake'? Remember they cut her head off sometime later for that other statements. Also remember Heinz after the hurricane in Florida during the election of 2004 where she told the people there to eat steaks and John lost the election? Well know Obama has to get in on the band wagon and this is what the campaign came up with. Little wonder he is so popular right now with the people, they are so happy. The 24 million unemployed love lard as this is all they have to eat right now.

ObamaCare Under Attack : People Awakening

This movement started before the bill was even passed, at least by most Conservatives. I believe many others saw how flawed this nightmare health care bill was but didn't have the nerve to voice their opposition to the all powerful progressive socialist Democrats that were in total power at the time.

Even now, when this disaster has become fully understood was designed to crush the health care that we have now and implement a sorry substitute that will force the entire nation into dependency, and for millions, poverty, the politicians and many citizens still refuse to acknowledge it's failings.

Little wonder then we are so divided on so many different subjects. It all boils down to the people that believe America is still a place where anyone can become what ever they want to be, and those the have lost the faith in our great nation, it's Constitution that guarantees our rights and freedoms

So many have given up their personal freedoms for the false security of an all powerful central government that promises to do all things for you. All they demand is you vote for them and this November that's just what millions did. The results will see the American dream of success from hard work and dedication to a become more prosperous slip away as more and more of our citizens find hand outs easier to obtain then a job. Believe, this is the progressive agenda in a nut shell.

A Resistance Movement Rises Up Against ObamaCare
January 4, 2013
Source: Grace-Marie Turner, "A Resistance Movement Rises Up Against ObamaCare," Forbes, December 24, 2012.

ObamaCare may be the law, but a major resistance movement has already sprouted across the United States, says Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute.

• On Election Day, public approval of the law only stood at 38 percent.
• However, Mitt Romney was unable to capitalize on the unpopular provisions such as the individual mandate, employee mandate and state-run exchanges.
• The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) expects at least 6 million people to pay the initial $95 fine rather than purchase health insurance.

Opposition to the law continues to harden in several institutions. In Congress, several lawmakers are coming together to try and repeal and replace ObamaCare. For example, House committees are conducting investigations of improper spending.

Individual states have also begun to take measures that oppose the health care law. At least 21 states have expressed that they will not create health exchanges. Furthermore, many states have opted out of expanding Medicaid.

Moreover, many businesses have come out in opposition of the law. The fact that companies with more than 50 employees have to pay a penalty for not offering insurance has caused uproar. If a company does not provide insurance, it must pay a steep penalty of $2,000 per employee. As a result, many companies have begun to fire full-time employees or fill vacant spots with part-time workers.

Some religious institutions have also come out against ObamaCare. The Catholic Church, for example, opposes the administration's decision to force employers to provide access to contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs at no cost. About 40 lawsuits have been initiated by Catholic dioceses and other organizations that claim it violates the First Amendment.

Even with the law in place, the mounting coalition against it will severely undercut the effectiveness of the law. It requires willing states and individuals to fully participate in the law's mandates for it to provide health care for individuals that are uninsured.

Affordable Care Act Drives Cost Increases : Quality Decreases

This is just another nail the coffin of Affordable Care Act that was crammed down all of our throats by the progressive socialists in the dead of night. Not one Republican voted for this nightmare that will, when full implemented,actually destroy our health care, and not just for the 30 million new participants, but for everyone.

No one even read the bill before they rammed it through - Pelosi said it has to be "passed to find out what's in it". Socialist Democrats at their best.

But is the Affordable Care Act really about health care? Really? Or is it designed to 'level' the playing field so that the 90% of the population that has health care give up their policies so that the 10% that doesn't want or need or care about health care, can get the care they want and not have to pay for it? Destroy the entire system to make sure 10% of the population is covered, and bring another huge number of dependent individuals under the wing of progressive socialist control.

Interesting? Could a political party be willing to destroy the countries entire health care system just to get another few million voters? Would progressive socialist liberal Democrats do this? - ah, it's done! Who voted for this in November? The 'low information' voter or the mentally deranged voter?

Why ObamaCare's Health Care Cost Controls Won't Work
January 4, 2013
Source: Peter Suderman, "Why ObamaCare's Health Care Cost Controls Won't Work," Reason Magazine, December 13, 2012.

As Congress comes together to further discuss long-term debt reduction strategies, lawmakers on the left are unwilling to tackle the issue that matters the most: entitlement spending. In particular, many prominent Democrats have argued against any reductions to Medicare, says Peter Suderman, a senior editor at Reason magazine.

• Many opponents of cutting Medicare argue that health care cost control measures that have been passed in recent years -- such as the Affordable Care Act (ACA) -- are yet to be implemented and evaluated fully.
• One measure in the ACA creates financial incentives for hospitals to avoid preventable readmissions.
• Another, called Value Based Purchasing, pays more to hospitals that perform better on certain quality metrics.

Both reforms stem from the idea that reducing health care costs must come from changing the way the government pays for health care. With regard to financial incentives, there is little evidence that pay-for-performance reduces overall health costs.

• In one study, there was a short-term increase in the quality of care a hospital offered but it disappeared after five years.
• Another study looked at the 30-day mortality rates in hospitals that participated in the quality incentive demonstration project and found no difference between participating hospitals and those that didn't participate.
• Similarly, a pay-for-performance pilot program launched in Medicaid found no quality improvement.

There is also little evidence that Value Based Purchasing will yield savings. One study found that the program has a small impact on hospital payments that is not enough to incentivize better care or a reduction in costs.

Another touted cost-saving measure in the ACA is the Medicare Shared Saving Program. This program was created to provide bonuses to more care groups that are more cost-efficient. However, the projected savings would actually be 1 percent or less.

The ACA is not the only health care cost control measure put in place by the Obama administration. The 2009 stimulus bill gave $30 billion to incentivize hospitals to adopt new information technology systems. But like other cost control measures, this ended up costing taxpayers about $1 billion a year more because hospitals billed Medicare more.

Progressive Democrats Stealing from Storm 'Sandy' Victims

This is more insanity from our government officials, especially in the Senate under the control of the ultimate progressive socialist Harry Reid.

Reid waited until the last hour of the year to bring this bill to the floor for a vote by the legislature and was turned down by the Republicans. The press and RINOs went nuts, Chris Christie of New Jersey and Peter King from New York went on TV demanding action.

The fact that this bill of 60 billion was to aid the flood victims in New York, New Jersey and other states, was designed to be passed without debate for a good reason, it contained 51 billion dollars of pork, items that have no connection to aiding the victims of this huge storm disaster.

The Republicans waited until Friday to pass one section of the bill that was to aid the victims only, 9 billion dollars. The rest of the bill will now be debated on the floor all the nation to see.

Do you wonder who produced this travesty at the last minute, behind closed doors? Just like most other bills that seek to steal tax dollars, the progressive socialist liberal Democrats in the Senate.

 Did the press put this on the front page of their Marxist rags, of course not. It's the socialist Democrats that are screwing the taxpayers and the Sandy victims, so it's okay with the media. The press turned a blind eye to the Democrats fraud. 

But who is attacked by the Marxist for not jumping on the band wagon of fraud and out right theft of Chinese money, the Republicans.

Hey, but wait, who voted for the progressives agenda of decline and poverty in November? Who decided our country will be better off with millions living in card board boxes and waiting in soup lines? The Unemployed at 24 million and going up every day. Who voted to put two more progressive socialist into the Senate?  Who? Why?

What Is Really In the Bloated Sandy Aid Package?

(Heritage Foundation)
Leaders from New Jersey and New York blew up yesterday after House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) postponed a vote on an aid package related to Hurricane Sandy. But the bill is so loaded with pork projects that these officials should consider directing their anger at the Obama Administration, which is hijacking the aid meant for their constituents.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie “in an angry news conference decried the ‘selfishness and duplicity,’ the ‘palace intrigue,’ ‘the callous indifference to the people of our state,’” ABC News reported.
Representative Peter King (R-NY) accused Boehner of “plunging ‘a cruel knife in the back’ of storm-ravaged residents ‘who don’t have shelter, don’t have food.’”
The real “selfishness and duplicity,” however, comes from those who insist that this bill is meant for Sandy’s victims—when in reality, it is a special-interest money fest. This is a terrible way to treat storm victims, by piling on other projects and tying them to an emotional legislative vote.
It amounts to exploiting disaster victims, which is inexcusable. That’s where the anger should be focused.

The estimate of insured losses from Sandy comes in around $20 billion—but the total aid package proposed is three times that amount. Roughly $28 billion of the request is marked for future disaster-mitigation projects.
The bill includes funding for Head Start, the federal day care program. As Heritage’s Lindsey Burke, the Will Skillman fellow in education policy, explains, some Head Start centers may need repairs from hurricane damage, but handing the program $100 million—as the Sandy aid package would—is a large expenditure that deserves more scrutiny.

Other questionable items in the package, which have received wide media coverage, include money for fisheries in Alaska, free money for the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and repairs to the Smithsonian. Heritage’s Patrick Louis Knudsen adds that “there is the truly audacious $17 billion in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, an embarrassingly transparent slush fund.”
As Heritage visiting fellow Matt Mayer has said, there is a much larger issue here. The spending request:

reflects the President’s cavalier attitude toward spending and deficits. He intends to exploit loopholes in the Budget Control Act that allow this new spending, above existing spending limits, without offsets. In an era of chronic trillion-dollar deficits, this is an act of willful fiscal negligence.

Mayer says the priority should be Sandy’s real victims: “all requests for funding for federal departments and agencies that does not flow to states, localities, businesses, or citizens for response and recovery activities should not be included in this supplemental request.”
Hurricane Sandy is the type of disaster that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) should address. Federal assistance is needed. But the Obama Administration’s exploitation of hurricane victims for billions in additional government spending deserves an angry response from those affected by the storm.

Worst Regulations for 2012 : Many More in 2013

The Heritage Foundation has the nightmare that is the progressive socialist agenda pegged. The socialist liberal Democrats believe that those of us in the trenches can't begin to understand the complexities of life better then they can, after all, they are the ones that the voters said should rule us. Right?

By the way, those that voted for more of the same decided that having less money in their collective pockets is a good thing as well.

The saddest part to all this is those that voted for more regulation, and ultimately loss of personal freedom, have no idea what they did, and worse, they never will, no matter how bad things get or how much freedom they lose, they will always believe.

They are unaware of the present and blind to the future.

What Are The 10 Worst Regulations of 2012?

It seems that no aspect of American life can escape government regulation. In the past year, regulators drafted rules that addressed everything from caloric intake to dishwasher efficiency.
Most of these rules increase the cost of living, others hinder job creation, and many erode freedom. Not all regulations are unwarranted, of course, but increasingly, the rules imposed by the government have less to do with health and safety and more to do with whether government or individuals get to make basic pocketbook and lifestyle decisions that affect them. And it is not just the regulators who are to blame. Congress writes laws that give unelected bureaucrats the broad powers they wield.
Today we bring you 10 of the worst regulations from 2012:
1. HHS’s Contraception Mandate
The Department of Health and Human Services on February 15 finalized its mandate that all health insurance plans include coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilization procedures, and contraceptives. To date, 42 cases with more than 110 plaintiffs are challenging this restriction on religious liberty.
2. EPA Emissions Standards
The EPA in February finalized strict new emissions standards for coal- and oil-fired electric utilities. The benefits are highly questionable, with the vast majority being unrelated to the emissions targeted by the regulation. The costs, however, are certain: an estimated $9.6 billion annually.
3. Fuel Efficiency Standards
In August, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in tandem with the Environmental Protection Agency, finalized fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks for model years 2017–2025. The rules require a whopping average fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. Sticker prices will jump by hundreds of dollars.
4. New York’s 16-Ounce Soda Limit
Not all regulations come from Washington. On September 13, at the behest of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the New York City Board of Health banned the sale of soda and other sweetened drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.
5. Dishwasher Efficiency Standards
Regulators admit that these Department of Energy rules will do little to improve the environment. Rather, proponents claim they will save consumers money. But they will also increase the price of dishwashers, and only about one in six consumers will keep his or her dishwasher long enough to recoup the cost.
6. School Lunch Standards
The U.S. Department of Agriculture in January published stringent nutrition standards for school lunch and breakfast programs. More than 98,000 elementary and secondary schools are affected—at a cost exceeding $3.4 billion over the next four years.
7. Quickie Union Election Rule
In April, the National Labor Relations Board issued new rules that shorten the time allowed for union-organizing elections to between 10 and 21 days. This leaves little time for employees to make a fully informed choice on unionizing, threatening to leave workers and management alike under unwanted union regimes.
8. Essential Benefits Rule
Under Obamacare, insurers in the individual and small group markets will be forced to cover services that the government deems to be essential. Published on November 26, the HHS list of very broad benefits has created enormous uncertainty about the extent of essential treatment.
9. Electronic Data Recorder Mandate
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on December 13 issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to mandate installation of electronic data recorders, popularly known as “black boxes,” in most light vehicles starting in 2014. The government mandate understandably spooks privacy advocates.
10. “Simplified” Mortgage Disclosure and Servicing Rules
In July, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau released its proposal for a more “consumer friendly” mortgage process, with a stated goal of simplifying home loans. The rules run an astonishing 1,099 pages. Then, one month later, the bureau proposed more than 560 pages of rules for mortgage servicing.
No End in Sight
As busy as regulators were in 2012, do not look for them to slow down in the new year. We’ll continue to document the real-life impact with our ongoing Tales of the Red Tape series on The Foundry.