Category Archives: regulation

Immigration and Elections

Posted on by
Reply

Elections have consequences, a man said. Among those consequences is the shape of subsequent elections, I say.

Republicans in the new Congress are preparing their own immigration legislation, with the first batch centered on better border security and easing immigration requirements in technology, agriculture, and some other areas of interest to employers.

A question in too many minds, though, is whether President Barack Obama would veto such legislation, either because the bills might restrict his “executive actions” involving refusing to enforce existing immigration law or because, Republican.

The question is in too many minds because it might impact whether Republicans pass the legislation at all.

If the bills are good in their own right, pass them. Let Obama veto them. Shape the 2016 elections with those vetoes. Bring on the consequences of the 2014 mid-terms.

The Flexibility of No More Elections

Posted on by
Reply

Some high points of President Barack Obama’s activities since the 2014 midterm elections—the last elections he’ll ever have to face, even vicariously through his party.

He’s chosen to give favor to Cuba’s Castro brothers, while receiving nothing of value to the US in return.

He’s chosen to extend favor to Iran and their nuclear weapons program while assuring all who can hear him that he’ll veto any Congressional move to extend sanctions.

He’s chosen to suspend enforcement of immigration law while assuring all who can hear him that he’ll veto any Congressional move to force enforcement.

He’s chosen to continue blocking Keystone XL while assuring all who….

He has 2,375 proposed rules now awaiting final publication without checking even their underlying principle with Congress first, in a complete, cynical bypassing of Congress.

In his latest move, he’s chosen to release from Guantanamo yet five more terrorists without any assurance that they’ll not rejoin the terrorists. Here, though, rather than threatening to block Congressional action, he’s assuring all who can hear him that he’s just going to go right on blithely turning loose the terrorists we’ve got locked up in Guantanamo.

Obama’s flexibility now that the elections are over—the outright insubordination and, worse, lawlessness—stems from our enforcement ability. We can’t fire him at the next election; he’s out the door, anyway. He can’t be impeached; there are too many Democrats who actually believe these…misbehaviors…are legitimate.

What we can do, though, and what we should do, is fire the Democratic Party at the next election for its complicity in Obama’s misbehavior. And keep them out until they show us they’ve mended their ways.

What we can do, and what we should do also, is keep a close eye on the Republican Party via primaries and the main elections, firing Republicans where necessary, in recognition of the dangers—demonstrated by that Democratic Party—of one-party rule.

In the meantime, these are going to be a very dangerous two years for the Republic.

Voter Suppression

Posted on by
Reply

Critics of voter ID laws always cry, “Voter suppression!” and they especially cry, “Black voter suppression!”

Here are some actual facts from North Carolina’s 2014 mid-term elections—an especially stern test since voter turnout typically is lower than in Presidential elections:

  • the percentage of age-eligible, non-Hispanic black residents who turned out to vote in North Carolina rose to 41.1% in November 2014 from 38.5% in November 2010
  • [t]he percentage of black registrants voting increased to 42.2% from 40.3% in the same period
  • the black share of votes cast increased to 21.4% from 20.1%
  • [t]he absolute number of black voters increased 16%, to 628,004 from 539,646

And in another state, according to Census Bureau surveys

  • turnout among blacks of voting age in Tennessee in 2012 remained stable within the margin of error
  • [turnout] was around 4% higher than white turnout
  • [t]urnout among Hispanic voters rose.

With suppression like this, who needs get out the vote programs?

Government Intrusion

Posted on by
Reply

…into citizens’ lives, and one State government’s response.

Virginians who try to sell homemade food from their kitchens are feeling the heat from state and local inspectors.

“I have to turn down my neighbors when they ask if they can buy pesto I make from my own basil plants,” says Bernadette Barber, a farmer in Lancaster, VA.

And

In Arlington, government inspectors shut down a home-based soup maker, even though no customer complaints had been registered. Others have encountered similar fates, stripping them of needed income.

Because Government Knows Better. And there might be a problem.

No. Our Constitution was designed to facilitate us restraining government beforehand, not the other way around. The Virginia legislature appears to understand that.

HB 1290, sponsored by Delegate Rob Bell, R-Charlottesville, would end home-kitchen inspections on items produced for direct sale. The goods would bear a label stating that the products are not for resale and were processed without state inspection.

Absent this, government, “You’re missing a good opportunity to shut up.” It’s worth tracking this bill to see whether it gets enacted.

How’s Obamacare Working Out?

Posted on by
Reply

How’s Obamacare Working Out?

President Barack Obama offered this justification for the structure of his Obamacare:

My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. That’s how the market works. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. And without competition, the price of insurance goes up and quality goes down.

How’s he doing by his own standard?

  • In 2015, 89% of total US counties will have five or fewer companies selling coverage in the exchanges. In 2014, 94% of counties had five or fewer insurers on the exchange.
  • In 2015, the exchange market in 57% of US counties will feature competition among three or fewer insurers. In 2014, 78% of all counties had three or fewer insurers.
  • In Texas, 62% of the state’s counties have only one or two insurers offering coverage in the exchange in 2015. There are 14 different insurers selling policies on the Texas exchange, but no Texas county has more than nine carriers offering coverage.
  • West Virginia still has only one insurer offering coverage on the exchange in 2015. Thus, any state resident purchasing coverage on the ACA’s exchange has no choice of insurer.

A tiny bit of improvement over last year, except in West Virginia, where 100% is controlled by just one company.

But.

By another measure, this one the GAO’s, as reported at the link above,

…in 2013 the individual insurance market encompassed 1,232 insurance carriers selling full health coverage. Obamacare exchanges support just 310 insurance companies as of 2015.

Lastly, this is the trend according to the GAO since Obamacare became law; some of the data predate ObamaMart’s activation:InsurerShare

Hmm….