The Intransigent Conservative

Showing posts with label Recess Appointments. Show all posts

Monday, January 28, 2013

Monday's Menagerie

@ericallie

Michael Ramirez

Jeff Darcy

View the story "Monday's Menagerie (1/28/13)" on Storify Monday's Menagerie (1/28/13) http://theintransigentconservative.blogspot.com Storified by Brian Empric· Mon, Jan 28 2013 18:54:08 Illegal immigrants are competing with less-educated American citizens for jobs. 50.6% of working-age adult American citizens (18 to 65) not holding a job have no education beyond high school. This is 27.7 million potential less-skilled workers, while seven to eight million illegal immigrants are thought to be holding a job, the overwhelming majority of which have no more than a high school education. Steven A. Camarota, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, concludes:

“It is difficult to overstate the size of the pool of potential workers that now exists in the United States. If through enforcement a large fraction of illegal immigrants returned to their home countries rather than being allowed to stay with legal status, there would seem to be an ample supply of idle workers to replace them, particularly workers who have relatively little education. Of course, employers might have to pay more, and offer better benefits and working conditions in order to attract American citizens. But improving the living standards and bargaining power of the least-educated and poorest American workers can be seen as a desirable social outcome. The contention that there is a general labor shortage that has to be satisfied by giving work authorization and/or citizenship to illegal immigrants and increasing the number of immigrants allowed into the country seems entirely inconsistent with the available evidence.”

“While it would be a mistake to think that every job taken by an illegal immigrant is a job lost by a native, it would also be a mistake to imagine that allowing illegal immigrants to stay permanently in their jobs has no impact on labor market outcomes for U.S.-born workers.”
Amnesty and the U.S. Labor MarketThe president and his political allies seem to believe that the kinds of jobs done by such workers are plentiful. However, the findings o... Melanie Trottman (@wsjMelanie), Jess Bravin (@JessBravin) and Michael R. Crittenden report that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled last week that President Obama violated the Constitution in filling three National Labor Relations Board vacancies, and therefore those recess appointments are invalid.

“The decision strips the board of key powers and could void some of its actions over the past year.

“The board made more than 200 case rulings last year, including a decision that protected workers from being fired for complaining about working conditions on sites like Facebook, and a decision that gave greater rights to unions in employee-discipline cases.

“The ruling also puts in jeopardy recent moves by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, since its director, Richard Cordray, also was installed in a recess appointment.”

“The court case turned on whether the Senate was in recess when Mr. Obama made the appointments during a holiday break early last year. The Constitution allows a president to unilaterally install nominees to positions that normally require Senate confirmation when the Senate is in recess.”

“The Justice Department didn't immediately announce its next move, but an appeal to the Supreme Court is likely.”
Court Rules Obama Recess Appointments Unconstitutional - http://WSJ.com http://on.wsj.com/W7rSAK via @WSJMichael Crittenden “There was a time when you had to be successful on Wall Street to become secretary of the Treasury. Now along comes presidential nominee Jack Lew, whose only business credential is a stint at the most troubled too-big-to-fail bank.”

“There probably weren't many laughs at Citi during the market panic in 2008. But if someone had said that a (Citigroup’s now defunct Alternative Investments unit) executive would be the secretary of the Treasury within five years, the line would have brought the house down.”

“Defenders of Mr. Lew say that by the time he showed up at CAI most of the bad decisions had already been made. But even if Mr. Lew didn't create the mess, the taxpayers who ended up underwriting his seven-figure compensation might want to know what exactly he was doing to clean it up.”

“If confirmed, Mr. Lew will chair the Financial Stability Oversight Council, responsible for identifying and addressing ‘systemic risks’ to the financial system. It's hard to believe he can competently perform this task if his only experience in a similar situation ended in failure.”

“Before he took the top operating job at the CAI division, he held the same job at Citi's Global Wealth Management division, beginning in July 2006… while Mr. Lew's future colleagues at the CAI division were cooking up toxic investments, some of his Global Wealth Management colleagues were feeding them to investors.”

“The greatest irony is that given Mr. Lew's crisis-era resumé, he bears a remarkable resemblance to the bankers who President Obama says created the financial crisis and deserve federal investigation. But apparently there's an exception as long as your liberal intentions are noble and you're a loyal Democrat. Then you can get rich at one of Wall Street's biggest failures and end up running the entire financial system.”
Treasury Gets a CitibankerThere was a time when you had to be successful on Wall Street to become secretary of the Treasury. Now along comes presidential nominee J... James C. Capretta (senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute) and Jeffrey H. Anderson (senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute) write that the Obamacare fight has just begun and the only question is how to proceed, unless we are willing to give in to an eventual single-payer, universal, socialized health care system.

“Only 18 states plus the District of Columbia are planning to take on the full responsibility for the administration of Obamacare… Steadfast resistance by so many states is a welcome and important development. In addition to the signal that such resistance sends, Congress hasn’t authorized funding for the federally run Obamacare exchanges that would operate in place of state-based ones.”

“In addition to opting out of establishing the exchanges, states can also refuse to implement Obamacare’s massive expansion of Medicaid. The Supreme Court opened up this option by striking down the law’s onerous penalties on states that decline to raise the income cutoff for Medicaid eligibility by 33 percent, as Obamacare prescribes.”

“Beyond these encouraging developments in the states, however, there are two proposals that Republicans should embrace in the early months of 2013 to help destabilize Obamacare and lay the foundation for its eventual replacement. First, congressional Republicans should push for a delay in Obamacare’s implementation. Second, the party should unite behind, and persuasively advance, a credible and practical replacement plan—for one cannot replace Obamacare without offering a replacement.”

“Once a possible delay gets floated by Republicans in Congress, it could gather momentum. Many governors, including some Democrats, are likely to support such a move because they see a train wreck coming in 2014 and are eager to avoid it.”

“…the most important thing for the GOP at this point is to develop and unite behind a practical replacement proposal—one that will actually solve the very real problems plaguing American health care… Americans want reform of some sort to address the issues of preexisting conditions, rapidly rising costs, and unstable and insecure insurance for tens of millions of their fellow citizens.”

“Since World War II, the federal tax code has been heavily biased toward job-based insurance. As a result, those without access to employer plans have a very difficult time finding affordable insurance. In reforming the insurance market, Republicans should end the tax code’s discrimination against those outside of the employer-based system.”

“The primary problem in American health care is that it operates without the discipline of a properly functioning marketplace. The federal government’s subsidies in Medicare and Medicaid, and its tax subsidies to employer plans, are open-ended and increase when costs rise. This undercuts the incentive for price-shopping and for judicious use of resources.”

“If Republicans were to advance a replacement along these lines—a plan that would provide stable insurance options, consumer choice, and high-quality health care without the heavy-handed mandates and regulations of Obamacare—the American people would be more than happy to throw Obamacare overboard.”

“In direct contradiction to what President Obama repeatedly promised, Americans will soon realize two things: Obamacare will cause health costs to rise, not fall; and just because they like their health plans, that doesn’t mean they’ll get to keep them… Since Obamacare will mandate that businesses with at least 50 workers provide insurance to all ‘full-time’ employees—defined under the overhaul as those who work at least 30 hours a week—the 49-employee business and the 29-hour week will both become commonplace.”
Delay, Repeal, ReplaceWatching Congress take the final steps to pass Obamacare in March 2010 was a bitterly disappointing moment for the law's opponents. They ... Diversity of State Coverage OptionsBrian_Empric Micah Cohen blogs that “an Electoral College based on Congressional districts would be decidedly more friendly to Republican presidential candidates than the current system” and changes would pose danger for Democrats.

“With Virginia, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin awarding their electors proportionally by Congressional district, Mr. Obama would have won re-election by just 30 electoral college votes instead of 126… If those five states and Florida had switched to a proportional system, Mr. Romney would currently be getting accustomed to the West Wing computers.”

“The states where Democrats could gain a significant number of votes from proportional allocation by Congressional district — Texas, Georgia, North Carolina and Arizona — are all controlled by Republicans. In addition, even if the system were somehow put in place in every state, the payoff for Democrats would be substantially smaller than the G.O.P.’s electoral windfall.”
The proposed changes to electoral college may be unlikely to all pass, but GOP is proposing them where it would matter http://nyti.ms/YtBid0Micah Cohen