Oh, this is hilarious.
Here you have a group of individuals who believe regulation is "job killing". Well, when you are dealing with elected persons who lack administrative sophistication, you must assume their advice comes from their advocates... oops, I mean lobbyists, the same individuals who would significantly benefit from less regulatory mandates.
See, it goes like this, even though all three branches of government have their input into any administrative regulation that comes down, it is actually "job killing" because most of the local governments would not be in operation if they had to be compliant, let alone have to be compliant wtih civil rights policies. This rings with even more truth when you understand that these "economically significant" new rules that may come down are dealing with privatization, out-sourced by state governments.
If one possessed basic understanding of the legislative process, one would know there currently exists multiple forms of input from the people regarding the formation and adoption of regulations beyond the sole elected official.
There is the Federal Registry which allows for public content. The elected official who is concerned with having a voice should assist and engage his/her constituents in the opportunities to submit historical comments into federal record.
Then, there is always the role of the elected official to, again, assist and engage his/her constituents on how to contact the administrators of each agency to voice concerns and to provide critical input in the development of any policies.
Alas, it seems here the elected official would prefer to bog down the legislative process in minutia of applying a fifth layer of approval for policies which would virtually shut down governmental functions. Grandstanding at its finest.
Now, let's examine the counterfactual of a "so-called" removal of regulatory policies. Let's take EPA for example.
You remove regulation of EPA, people become sick and die. Sick people tend to cause a soaring costs to overall health care. Sick people can not work nor be productive to society which means that they will not be able to afford individual private insurance and seek the single payer programs. The moral hazard kicks in to increase the cost of private insurance placing more individuals at risk of loosing their medical coverage.
As the insurance companies financially benefit with an increase in profits by cherry picking who will be insured, there will be a need to further reduce its work force with fewer clients.
Dead people do not work nor pay taxes.
Now, that is what I call "job-killing", literally.
Beverly Tran
An Original Source
Michigan Senate Resolution To Memorialize Congress For Moritoria On Regulation With REINS Act 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment