Tag Archives: regulation

More Government Interference

Posted on by
Reply

The Obama administration plans to require large employers to peel back the curtain on how much they pay men and women in a push to narrow long-standing earning gaps between the genders.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission will roll out details of the plan Friday to begin gathering a summary of pay data from employers with 100 or more workers.

Leave aside the lack of validity of the data so confiscated by the government.

Statisticians and economists note…that analyzing wage disparities is a complex undertaking, and that aggregating data about many occupations is especially tricky.

“You can’t compare apples and oranges in the same group and draw meaningful conclusions,” said David Cohen, president of DCI Consulting Group, a Washington, DC, firm that conducts pay-equity analyses for companies. “You’re going to get too many false positives and too many false negatives.”

Beyond that, far beyond that, the data are none of the government’s business absent a specific allegation of wrong-doing. If there is a specific complaint—not a blanket fishing expedition borne of this administration’s FDR-esque paranoia about business in general—then get a warrant upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized, just like the 4th Amendment requires.

A Thought on Gun Rights

Posted on by
Reply

The city of Lowell, MA, and its police chief have one. It’s dead wrong, too. The city’s new law, pushed by its Police Superintendent, William Taylor,

requires residents applying for a license to carry handguns to write “an essay” and pay upwards of $1,100 for training.

Aside from the outlandish cost being just another means of denying licenses to American citizens (training required in Texas, for instance, costs around $300), there’s this, from police department spokesman, Captain Timothy Crowley:

If you want a license to carry a firearm unrestricted wherever you want and whenever you want, the superintendent is just looking for some documentation as to why. That is not unreasonable to most people.

Yes, it is unreasonable to most people. It’s also wholly and cynically unconstitutional. Here’s what the 2nd Amendment says on the matter:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Notice that. There’s nothing in there that says, “Shall not be infringed unless Government disapproves the man’s reason.” There’s nothing in there that even grants Government a right to ask, much less to know, a citizen’s reason to keep and bear his Arms. Just for clarity’s sake, too, the Supreme Court has ruled that this is entirely an individual right, and not a collective one.

No. The only legitimate way to require licenses to keep and bear is, after training, on a will issue basis.

Full stop.

It Must Be Dissolved

Posted on by
Reply

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, that is. Consider this example of its egregious behavior. When one of CFPB’s internal judges decided that

a New Jersey lender [PHH Corp] took illegal “kickbacks” from mortgage insurers, boosting costs for borrowers[,]

he fined the company $6 million. PHH appealed.

Richard Cordray, Director of the CFPB, took personal charge of the case and raised the penalty to $109 million. How dare a private company dispute with the CFPB!?

This abuse of power, even a power that the Democratic Party-controlled House and Senate conferred on the CFPB, together with a budget consisting of a blank check drawn on the Federal Reserve Bank System, when they created this thing six years ago, is a clear demonstration of the need to get rid of the CFPB and everything and everyone associated with it.

PHH’s case has been appealed to the DC Circuit, but there’s no need to wait. Get rid of this abusive, unaccountable board. Put this abusive, unaccountable Boyar out of a job.

The Supreme Court and Utilities

Posted on by
Reply

The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the federal government’s ability to spur incentives for industrial businesses, schools and other large energy consumers to reduce power usage at times of peak demand.

The court, in a 6-2 ruling by Justice Elena Kagan, said the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission acted within its powers when it issued an order in 2011 requiring higher levels of compensation for some power customers that agreed to reduce their electricity use.

The Court likely is right on this, in that FERC’s rule is within the confines of the underlying law. However, this still is the government picking winners and losers, and this still is the government dictating to private enterprise what it must do.

The corrective answers that are required, then, are two: one is to withdraw FERC’s authority to issue such rules, to rescind Congress’ delegation of such rule-making to FERC (such a rescission is required across the board, but that’s for another writing).

The other required answer is to alter the underlying law that the FERC rule was…fleshing out. It’s a law that is no longer necessary and that, as the FERC rule demonstrates, has become vulnerable to Executive Branch abuse.

That law is Section 201 of the Federal Power Act, which

empowers FERC to regulate “the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce.”

Congress’ authority (not an Executive Branch agency’s) to regulate interstate commerce is constitutionally limited to regularizing commerce among the States, not to dictate the terms of that commerce. Of course, for Congress to recover this authority and its limits, a third required answer consists of correcting a number of Supreme Court mistakes regarding how far Big Government may reach inside any State to regulate commerce there.

More Regulations

Posted on by
Reply

Jason Godsil, founder and CEO of Godsil Motorcars, is building a new car that will run on natural gas; he’s in the design and prototyping stage. Joel Feder, of MotorAuthority, asked this question and got an answer that should be embarrassing to the Obama administration and its predecessors.

What’s the largest unforeseen issue you’ve encountered?

Crash tests and EPA certifications will need to be done but the level that will be required for a fully certified vehicle was an eye opener. … Do you want to use a custom headlight that isn’t used currently? Sure, we can look at that for $300,000. Do you want to have multiple options for seat belt colors? Sure, that will be $30,000 for the test of each color. It’s crazy! That is why other countries get some car models that are never for sale here in America.

Indeed.

There was this little tidbit in that conversation, too [emphasis added].

When do you realistically think the first production car will hit the street?

The ideal timeline is that we could debut a prototype, using the prototype engine we are working on now, in about eight-to-ten months after we finalize with our investment partners. With the development and testing of the powertrain and all the certifications that will be needed, we envision a production car hitting the streets about three-to-four years later.

This is just…amazing.