The honorable member of the Senate delivered this intellectual commentary from the floor yesterday. We’re not sure which is more ludicrous; stating that millionaire job creators don’t exist or that unicorns are impossible to find.

From The Hill:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) suggested on Monday that millionaires who create jobs are a mere figment of Republicans’ imaginations.

“Millionaire job creators are like unicorns,” said Reid from the Senate floor.  “They are impossible to find and don’t exist.”

Reid’s frustration has grown in past weeks as Republicans have repeatedly and overwhelmingly blocked almost every fragment of President Obama’s jobs package brought to the floor because Democrats have attempted to pay for them by raising taxes on millionaires. Republicans say they oppose that tax because it would hamper job creation.

But Reid said Monday morning that there was no evidence of a correlation between taxes on the wealthy and jobs.

“Republicans say the richest of the rich in our country … shouldn’t contribute more to put our economy back on track,” said Reid. “They call our plan time after time a ‘tax on job creators,’ and I say so-called job creators because … every shred of evidence contradicts this red herring.”

(more…)

Republicans in the Senate, led by Sen. Dick Lugar,  have introduced a bill that would force President Obama to act on initiating construction of the-1,700 mile Keystone XL crude oil pipeline from Canada. The project is expected to create approximately 20,000 jobs and increase energy security for the United States.

Although President Obama has been openly mocking and denouncing Congress for failing to pass his jobs bill, his decision, through the State Department, to delay the Keystone XL project until after the November 2012 elections has led to criticism that the president is putting politics ahead of the best interests of the country.

37 Republican senators signed onto the bill that would require the administration to approve the pipeline project within 60 days, unless Mr. Obama declares the project is not in the national interest.

The Keystone project has been interesting in that it has marked a division between two groups that have been very supportive of the president: environmentalists and Big Labor. Environmental groups, fearing oil spills and other ecological disasters, as well as celebrity “green” fans, have opposed the pipeline plan, while labor groups have supported it in the hopes of obtaining high-paying union jobs. In addition, none of the states involved in the pipeline’s path- Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma or Texas- supported Mr. Obama in the presidential election of 2008.

While the Keystone project had already been found to be environmentally sound prior to the president’s delay of the pipeline’s construction, some rerouting of the pipeline was done in Nebraska, for example, and approved by that state’s legislature quickly so as not to prevent the project from moving forward. Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Nebraska) is supporting the bill to force implementation of the pipeline. “This bill respects the Nebraska process to protect the Sand Hills while providing a commonsense approach to bring friendly oil and jobs to the U.S. without unnecessary delay,” he said.

If the pipeline project is not implemented, Canada has said that it will sell its oil to China.

(more…)

The theme becoming familiar with all who are interested in the economy (judging by the latest labor statistics, I suspect there are many) is whether a president can actually create jobs. The answer to that question is obviously no; he can’t, at least not in a free enterprise system. However, a president can certainly pollute the environment and kill jobs as a consequence.

To whet your appetites and pique your interest, here is a list of job destroying regulations. Then consider Obama’s own recent retreat on EPA regulations and you see the proof.

1. NLRB’s Boeing Complaint

2. MACT and CSAPR Utility Standards

3. Boiler MACT Rules

4. Cement MACT Requirements

5. ‘Coal Ash’ Regulations

6. Grandfathered Health Plans

7. EPA Ozone Rule

8. EPA Farm-Dust Regulations

9. EPA Greenhouse-Gas Requirements

10.  NLRB ‘Ambush’ Elections Rule

Now Obama and his sycophants are saying his presidency is just as much a victim to the economic circumstances as the American worker and businesses. That’s saying something considering 14 million people unemployed and more than 25 million unable to find full-time work. In fact, President Obama and his government-first Democrat cohorts have actually made the economy worse and prolonged the recession.

(more…)

Today, the Obama Administration sent legislation to Congress, detailing its latest plan to spur job creation. It relies on half-a-trillion dollars in new spending with an almost equivalent amount of tax increases. Very little of the proposed spending would actually spur new investment or hiring, while most of the tax hikes would work directly against them. The man is simply out of tricks. (Full text below.)

American Jobs Act — final

Who would have really expected a 300-point stock market plunge on the day after President Obama’s so-called jobs speech?

Yes, worries over new fears of a Greek default ripped through the markets on Friday. As did fears of an al-Qaeda bombing plot on the tenth anniversary of 9/11. But you can’t help but think that at least some of the stock plunge is a signal of no economic confidence in Obama’s plan.

And for that matter, who really expected an unbelievably large $450 billion plan? That’s way more than 50 percent of the original $800 stimulus package in 2009 — which did not work.

Leaked reports leading up to the speech suggested a $300 billion plan — already way too big. But $450 billion? At a time of massive deficits and debt? And a downgrade? How is this going to be paid for? That’s what many folks want to know. Obama didn’t tell us.

In very round numbers, the package comes to $250 billion of temporary payroll tax cuts of one kind or another, with another $200 billion in new spending on infrastructure, unemployment benefits, and direct aid to state and local governments. But didn’t we learn from Obama Stimulus One that more government spending doesn’t grow the economy or reduce unemployment?

And while more than half of the president’s new package is called “tax cuts,” the reality is that these are temporary tax cuts. Even though tax rates are reduced for both employers and employees, it’s just for one year.

That blunts the true incentive impact of the tax cuts. Businesses like to look ahead at least three to five years for their employment planning. And they’re already worried about the tax and regulatory mandate costs of Obamacare, which has become a great deterrent to job creation. But nobody makes clear business decisions based on temporary one-year tax cuts. That’s not the way business works.

(more…)

Las Vegas CEO Steve Wynn drew attention for a boardroom rant denouncing the intolerable business climate fostered by the White House. He’s hardly the first. What’s happening is emblematic of a bigger problem.

On a Monday conference call, the casino magnate credited with revitalizing Las Vegas slammed President Obama, declaring him “[T]he greatest wet blanket to business, progress and job creation in my lifetime.”

Wynn’s statement was remarkable for two reasons: First, the hotelier has been a staunch supporter of the Obama administration from the beginning and still considers himself a Democrat. Even more remarkable, it’s historically out of character for CEOs such as Wynn to express their views in such blunt terms on political matters.

“A lot of people don’t want to say that. They’ll say, ‘Oh God, don’t be attacking Obama.’ Well, this is Obama’s deal, and it’s Obama that’s responsible for this fear in America,” said Wynn, “The guy keeps making speeches about redistribution, and maybe ‘we ought to do something to businesses that don’t invest or (are) holding too much money.’ We haven’t heard that kind of talk except from pure socialists.”

Business is being hammered, he said. “I’m telling you that the business community in this country is frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the president of the United States.”

Andrew Puzder knows a thing or two about creating jobs. As CEO of CKE Restaurants, the parent company of many famous brands including Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s, Puzder has seen firsthand how government policies can help or hurt job creation. In his new book, “Job Creation: How It Really Works and Why Government Doesn’t Understand It”, Puzder and co-author Dave Newton share what they have learned.

Puzder spoke at Heritage this week and sat down with Heritage to talk about his experience in the business world.

(more…)

McDonalds Corp. conducted its much-publicized one-day, national hiring event Tuesday. Seeking to hire up to 50,000 employees, both full-time and part-time, the fast-food giant and its franchisees state that, while many of the jobs are of the minimum wage variety, sometimes sarcastically referred to as “McJobs,” managerial level positions are also available. Thousands arrived at McDonalds Restaurants across the country to apply for positions, many of which, according to McDonalds, are entry-level, but capable of leading to larger opportunities. While the company usually hires more employees at this time of year, prior to the summer traveling season, this event is different in that all the hiring is getting done in one day. A McDonalds executive stated that most McDonalds restaurant franchises pay more than the minimum wage, which is $7.25 per hour, nationally.

While it’s hopeful that many will be able to obtain much-needed jobs, even if on a temporary basis, the hiring event is also a sad commentary on the state of the nation’s economy. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the average age of a fast-food worker is almost 30 years old, up from 22 in 2000.

(more…)

When you think about a highly aggressive cartel teaming up with politicians to pass protectionist laws that kick entrepreneurs out of work, you probably don’t think about interior designers.

But you should.

The American Society of Interior Designers (ASID) represents less than 3 percent of all designers, but its members have designated themselves as spokespeople for the entire industry. ASID has spent over 30 years and millions of dollars lobbying from coast to coast for interior design licensing schemes.  Not surprisingly, the schemes they propose would force all interior designers to have the exact same credentials as required for membership in ASID.

The group has worked relentlessly to enlist state legislatures in its campaign for total industry cartelization. The Institute for Justice has documented these efforts in a study titled “Designing Cartels.”

Florida is ground zero right now in this epic battle.

(more…)

I’ve started more than a dozen small businesses. For one, over $20 million was invested by me and investors who believed in me. I’ve paid payrolls, health insurance, payroll taxes, workers comp, and unemployment insurance for hundreds of employees.

Because of that, my employees were able to pay their mortgages, buy groceries, send their kids to college, and provide for their families. For this same small business, I spent about $50 million dollars on things like advertising, marketing, promotion, lawyers and accountants. That money enriched and employed thousands of others. And, that’s just one small business. Think of the impact that thirty million small business owners have on the U.S. economy. No wonder we create 70% or more of America’s new jobs. Small businessmen and women are a far more powerful economic force than Exxon, Microsoft, GE, or Wal-Mart.

So why do Obama and his socialist cabal hate us? Why do small businessmen and women feel demonized and punished? Why is it Obama’s goal to drive us out of business?

Mug or rob me once? Maybe it’s ignorance or a mistake. Twice? It’s a pattern. But, coming up with ways to rob and destroy me and my businesses on a daily basis? It’s time to get the message. Without a doubt, Obama and the progressive left are the enemy of small business.

Let’s look at the facts.

(more…)

During Tuesday’s State of the Union address President Obama mentioned the word “jobs” 31 times, topping last year’s tally by two. Back then he promised to make jobs his “number-one focus in 2010″ and then promptly focused on passing ObamaCare, regulating Wall Street, slapping a moratorium on drilling for oil in the Gulf–he even made time to chat with the gals on The View (Prez doesn’t know who Snooki is!).

Although Obama did make some attempts to fight unemployment directly (especially for public-sector workers), today the unemployment rate stands at 9.4 percent, almost as high as it was one year ago.

(more…)

What drives an entrepreneur to start a business?  Is it solely about money?  Or is there something more?  I argue that often it is the  same creative drive that compels an artist to paint, a musician to compose, or a sculptor to look at a piece of rough marble and see an angel inside.  And those who understand the mind of the small business owner know why the proposed tax increase in 2011 will do more harm than good to the very people this economy needs most to create jobs.

On FBN’s Bulls & Bears recently Democratic strategist Jehmu Greene, the token liberal steak tossed into the wolf den of laissez faire commentators, uttered words to the effect that if we allow the Bush tax cuts to remain, the “rich” (I guess that’s me?) will not put the money into the economy but rather just squirrel it away “in their banks…It would not go into job creation or creating capital for small business.”

My first thought  was: “In my bank? Really?  How many businesses have you owned?” (To be fair she did co-found some internet venture called Urban Hang Suite which shuttered in 2003).  But then I reminded myself that, like Ms. Greene herself who has been in non-profit and/or government almost her entire career,  very few people in the  Obama administration, from the president on down, have ever started a business.  Thus they cannot understand what drives entrepreneurs to succeed.  They think it is just about take-home pay.

It’s said that small business owners work eighteen hour days for ourselves so we don’t have to work eight hours a day for someone else.  And often our income on a dollar/hour basis is less than the established firms we may have left to go on our own. Certainly this is generally true for those few scary years at the beginning when a myriad of mistakes are made and unanticipated events occur that prompt the principals to pay ourselves only after all other obligations have been met   So why do it?  Why take such risk?

(more…)

Julie Murphy is only seven years old, but she embodies the classic American zeal for entrepreneurship.

She learned about lemonade stands after seeing one in a cartoon.  She got excited and wanted to open one of her own.  And so Julie’s mother worked with her to get everything together and set up shop at a fair in Northeast Portland, Oregon.

20 minutes after opening, a government official approached and asked for their $120 occupational license.  Of course, they had no license.

And so 7-year-old Julie, the budding entrepreneur, was told to shut down her lemonade stand or face $500 in fines.

Julie and her mother were encouraged by others to keep the stand open and ask for donations instead.  Business picked up, and the regulators returned.  This time they made Julie cry.  They also got their wish:  Julie’s mom shut down the lemonade stand.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case of licensing gone wild.  Rather it is a classic example of a national problem that affects countless people in America every day.  Institute for Justice President Chip Mellor wrote this week in the Washington Times:

Mired in a nationwide jobless recovery, state and local governments have the power to create jobs and transform communities if they do one simple thing: Get out of the way of aspiring entrepreneurs.

Unfortunately for small businesses, however, laws restricting economic liberty are becoming more commonplace in America. Consider that since the 1950s, the percentage of occupations in the United States that require people to obtain permission from the government in the form of a license before they can pursue their chosen occupation has grown from a mere 5 percent to more than 30 percent.

Consider a few recent IJ cases:

(more…)

If government is serious about job creation, it should get out of the way of the entrepreneurs who actually create them.

That is the message of a new campaign launched this week by the Institute for Justice—the nation’s leading legal advocate for economic liberty. A series of studies called The Power of One Entrepreneur highlight the tremendous impact that a single entrepreneur can have on their family, employees, community, other entrepreneurs and beyond.

Consider Melony Armstrong of Tupelo, Mississippi.

Melony is an African hairbraider and a mother of four.  She is the owner of Naturally Speaking, a hairbraiding salon that serves her community and has employed dozens of women.  In addition, Melony has taught more than 125 individuals how to braid.

But before she could even open her doors, she had to battle through mountains of red tape. The state forced her to spend 300 hours in cosmetology classes.  And to teach others how to braid, she had to obtain a special license that required over 3,000 hours of additional classes.  Here’s the kicker:  In all of this government-mandating training, she received no actual instruction in hairbraiding.

In August 2004, Melony teamed up with the Institute for Justice to challenge these needless barriers that had the effect of keeping grassroots entrepreneurs just like her from being able to open their own businesses. Less than a year later, her case resulted in a new law that lifted the restrictions, paving the way for hairbraiding entrepreneurship throughout the state.

(more…)

According to Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unemployment benefits are the best way to create jobs, so why didn’t she get with Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and press him to schedule a pre-recess vote on the Republican alternative to the Democrat’s jobs/unemployment benefits bill introduced on June 30, 2010 by Senator Scott Brown (R-MA).

Brown’s bill is deficit neutral and could easily solve the current problems in passing the unemployment benefits package:

My compromise bill uses unspent stimulus funds and cuts wasteful and unnecessary spending in other areas to pay for these important programs. Believe it or not, there is about $37 billion in stimulus money just sitting in a Washington slush fund when it should be put to good use immediately.

While my bill pays for additional FMAP assistance for one more year, this phase-down provides states an opportunity to get their fiscal houses in order — but also makes it clear that they can no longer pass the buck to the federal government, which has budgetary problems of its own.  emphasis mine

Obama, Pelosi, and Reid should be called out on why they blatantly ignored Brown’s bill and also answer why they couldn’t fast track this one like they did with the  passage  of the original stimulus and Obamacare.  Of course, the answer is obvious:  Brown is a Republican and they couldn’t possibly give a win to the GOP.  So much for bipartisanship.

For the record, Democrats own this economy; they had the supermajority.  It’s their agenda, their stimulus, their failed policies.  Americans deserve and should be demanding answers from Obama and the Democrat leadership regarding their policies–Bush has been out of office for 18 months–there is no more childish blame shifting and finger pointing.

It is time for the Republicans to go on the offensive and force the Democrats to explain themselves to the American people on where are the jobs and why they squandered $800 billion of taxpayer money.  They need to stop fearing any backlash, because I’m not sure if there would be one, or maybe just from the left-wing MSM.  Americans are starving for someone to fight back and call out Obama and Congress for what they are doing to our country (paging NJ Governor Chris Christie).

(more…)

President Obama is coming to Youngstown today to tout his administration’s recovery efforts, but its policies are only making matters worse in the Mahoning Valley.

While it’s encouraging that the factory in Youngstown that the president will visit on Tuesday has recently expanded, the city’s painfully high 15.1 percent unemployment rate is a harsh reminder that the “stimulus” has not created jobs “immediately,” or held our national unemployment rate (9.9 percent) below eight percent as the president promised.

Worse yet, the policies of the Obama Administration could quickly put jobs at the factory, which manufactures steel pipes for oil and gas drilling, on the chopping block as it continues to push a “cap-and-trade” national energy tax that will raise energy prices, drive thousands of American jobs overseas to countries with less-stringent environmental regulations, and devastate our domestic oil and gas industries.

Last December the administration unilaterally acted to pave the way for this bureaucratic nightmare, and it’s not looking back. In fact, last week the EPA finalized new rules for manufacturers and power plants scheduled to go into effect in January of next year, regulations that American Iron and Steel Institute President and CEO Thomas Gibson warns “will impose significant new costs on manufacturing industries at the worst possible time… [and] arbitrarily picks winners and losers.”

(more…)

It’s hard to find a politician who isn’t eager to “do something” about high unemployment. Turns out California has found one way to save and create certain kinds of jobs—spend like mad and raise taxes.

That job-creation strategy has worked quite well for government-sector workers. Problem is the statewide unemployment rate is still among the highest in the nation, and many private-sector employers are heading to states like Texas, where taxes are lower and regulations are lighter.

“I would love to have companies calling me saying, ‘We’d like to move to California, can you help us with that relocation?’ I get none of those calls,” says business relocation coach Joe Vranich. “The calls I do get are, ‘Hello, we want to move out of California, can you help us do that?’”

Vranich says there’s no one reason why businesses leave. He calls it “death by a thousand cuts,” where job creators get fed up with everything from high taxes to traffic gridlock and legal hassles.

Take Rick and Jack Newcombe, the father-son team that runs Creators Syndicate.

(more…)

From the Associated Press:

A bipartisan jobs bill cleared a GOP filibuster on Monday with critical momentum provided by the Senate’s newest Republican, Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

The 62-30 tally to advance the measure to a final vote on Wednesday gives both President Barack Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats a much-needed victory—even though the measure in question is likely to have only a modest boost on hiring.

(more…)

Economist John Tamny has a piece in Forbes, “The Paradox Of A ‘Giving’ Government”, detailing the new, stepped-up emphasis by business on getting cozy with Washington, and how and why it pays off. In it is a very disturbing example of why we should expect at best weak and highly dispiriting pushback from Republicans when Obama finally gets around to following through on his telegraphed Plan B for the “global warming” agenda, “green jobs”.

“Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., presently a darling among Republicans for his pro-growth policies, has long made known his dislike of the 2009 Obama stimulus plan as a ‘wasteful spending spree.’ Nice rhetoric for sure–and as it turns out not very pure. In October 2009 the congressman wrote a letter to Labor Secretary Hilda Solis in favor of a grant application in his district, which, according to Ryan, would ‘place 1,000 workers in green jobs.’”

That’s pretty stomach-turning, when you consider the source. The government can give us nothing that it has not taken from us. The government cannot give your favored constituencies anything it has not taken away from others. The politics of envy have never been as strong in the United States as in Europe – which fact has given us a chance over the decades, but it appears to be a dwindling chance.

And no one who attended any appreciable part of CPAC this past weekend has any time for the philosophy that these are just the accommodations that one must make to stay here and do good work.

(more…)

This past week in Washington, DC has seen the GOP actively engaged in discussions and strategizing about taking back the House of Representatives and taking back the Senate.  But before the GOP, Tea Party, or anyone else, can take back the House or Senate, they will face a more difficult and important battle–taking back our language.

Democrats have made an art form of mis-speak, consistently showing only a passing familiarity with good, old Merriam-Webster.  Think Kafka and Orwell, where words are elastic, and plain-speaking is all but abandoned.

Understanding what President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are saying is difficult; for, though the language may seem to be English, in reality, they speak a different language, the language of the Democrats in DC.  To understand exactly what they are saying, Americans need an “English –Democratic Party Dictionary.   Here is a sampler of some of the most important words and phrases that cause confusion:

• INVESTMENT: President Obama and Speaker Pelosi frequently talk about the need for “investments”. For example, ” President Obama recently identified a need to invest in American infrastructure (and education)  What Mr. Obama and Nancy Pelosi really seem to mean when they talk about “investments” is that government needs to spend more.  Democrats  have learned from extensive polling that disguising calls for more government spending, and even greater national debt, are more palatable (to those that have not yet figured out the scam) if,  they talk about spending as  “investments”.  As most Americans know, making an investment  implies a return worthy of the risk.  Investors always want their money back and a profit to boot.  Fat chance of that!  According to the Democrat-version, “investments” are just spending by another name.  There will never be a return, and taxpayers putting their money are risk will never get their funds back, nor is there any chance of a decent return.

(more…)