HOUSE Republican Leader John Boehner

Giving a Voice to the “Stimulus Spending” Skeptics

In response to President-elect Obama’s request for Republican input, House Republicans formed a working group (led by Republican Whip Eric Cantor) aimed at developing constructive ideas that can be included in legislation to help put the nation’s economy on the path to recovery.

Yesterday, the working group held a hearing to discuss America’s economic recovery.  Joining the discussion were Governor Mitt Romney, Meg Whitman, Grover Norquist, Alex Brill, and Bill Beach.  In addition, the panel answered questions that were submitted for the panel by the American people via YouTube.  A video of the working group hearing is below.

In addition, Leader Boehner has solicited, and received, comments from prominent economists who are skeptical of Congressional Democrats’ trillion dollar spending plan.  Scholars’ opinions have continued to pour in, and they have been universally critical of the tax, spend, and borrow precepts of the Democratic proposal.  On January 7, Boehner released comments from dozens of skeptical economists, and since then, opinions have continued to stream in.

Following is some of the latest commentary made by economists about the impact of a massive government “stimulus spending” bill.   For a more detailed list, click here.

“I have a number of reservations about a major stimulus package. One is that it is not in any sense clear that the benefits justify the significant price tag of the package. Another concern is that the historical record of government stimulus programs is poor - I can’t think of a single fiscal stimulus program that demonstrably moderated a recession. But there is ample evidence based on peer-reviewed research that these programs have substantially damaged the U.S. economy, such as the New Deal programs in the 1930s. More recent stimulus attempts, such as the tax rebate in early 2008, did nothing but increase the deficit. The best policies are those that are evaluated carefully and not rushed out, and that are consistent with the key goals of long-run economic prosperity - broad-based tax reform that raises the incentives to work, save, and invest, promoting competition, and fostering economically open ties with other countries. Any fiscal policy should pass this test, and this one doesn’t seem to.”
-Lee Ohanian
Professor of Economics, University of California, Los Angeles
Director, Ettinger Family Program in Macroeconomic Research

“The stimulus plan is little more than a grossly-inefficient special-interest grab bag that will leave a massive burden for our grandchildren to pay and, in the meantime, deter development of more productive sectors of the economy in favor of those politically favored.”
-Roger Meiners
Professor of Economics, University of Texas at Arlington

Leader Boehner has repeatedly stated that “We can’t simply borrow and spend our way back to prosperity.”  Clearly many American economists tend to agree.

Permalink | No Comments »

---

If At First It Fails, Try, Try Again?

The Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts), has sponsored new legislation that would allegedly make the TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program) more accountable to the American people.  Despite the title of his bill, Rep. Frank’s “TARP Reform and Accountability Act of 2009″ (H.R. 384) provides neither reform nor accountability to the TARP.  That’s unfortunate, because both are desperately needed.

Though Rep. Frank’s bill does not authorize the release of the remaining $350 billion of TARP funds, the purpose of the bill is to help ensure that congressional efforts to stop the release of the remaining funds fail.  House Republican leaders today issued an analysis warning that “passage of H.R. 384 may facilitate the discharge of the final tranche by establishing guidelines for spending the next $350 billion for those Members concerned with how the first tranche was spent.”

There are several concerning elements of Rep. Frank’s Bill, most notably among them (From the “Statement of Republican Policy” issued Jan. 15, 2009):

1. There is a danger that the provisions in H.R. 384 place the TARP on a slippery slope to a “command-and-control” economic model.  For example, the bill provides for government observers to attend the meetings of the boards of directors of assisted institutions and at the committees of such boards while any funds from TARP remain outstanding.

2. The bill provides for the expenditure of up to $100 billion (and no less than $40 billion) to implement foreclosure mitigation programs that require taxpayers to subsidize the bad decisions of irresponsible lenders, investors, and borrowers, and have not been demonstrated to be effective in keeping borrowers in their homes or stemming the tide of defaults and delinquencies.

3. H.R. 384 attempts to “fix” the “Hope for Homeowners” program (P.L. 110-289), and make it a more attractive option for lenders and borrowers.  But in doing so, the bill abandons key safeguards in the original legislation that were designed to protect taxpayers from bearing huge losses when mortgages re-worked under the program default.  For example, H.R. 384 strikes the payment of upfront premiums paid to the Federal Housing Administration for providing the government guarantee (and sharply reduces the required annual premium), increases the permissible loan-to-value ratios, and cancels the government’s share of the profits in the event of long-term home price appreciation.

There has been a plethora of criticism from other quarters as well concerning the Frank bill and the larger effort by Democratic congressional leaders to ensure the remaining $350 billion in taxpayer funds is released. Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink | No Comments »

---

American Taxpayers Deserve a TARP Exit Strategy

Leader Boehner has an op-ed in today’s USA Today in which he expresses his reservations about approving the second tranche – which would amount to $350 billion – of money from the so-called TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program).  The Treasury Department has already blown through the first $350 billion, but the money was spent with little transparency and virtually no accountability.  This morning in USA Today, Leader Boehner argues that unless dramatic changes are made and a clear exit strategy is defined that would get the federal government back out of the private sector, Congress should not approve the release of any further TARP money.

This program has gone off the rails.  As Leader Boehner stated in his op-ed:

Funds that were intended to buy up “toxic assets” to help unlock the credit markets at the heart of the financial crisis suddenly made their way elsewhere. Some went to help financial institutions acquire other banks. Some went to the automobile companies. And some…well, we don’t really know where some of it went. Is it any wonder that taxpayers are outraged?

Moreover, given the mismanagement of the first $350 billion, Leader Boehner asks a reasonable question:

How could Washington even consider asking middle-class families and small businesses to cough up another $350 billion for this program?

American taxpayers deserve a TARP exit strategy, and major changes in the way the program is operated.  Until taxpayers get these things, Congress should not even consider releasing the remaining TARP money

Permalink | No Comments »

---

Keep the Airwaves Free of the Fairness Doctrine

Leading Democrats are pushing to restore the “Fairness Doctrine” - an antiquated idea which would effectively silence critics of the government. This blatant attempt to quash those who disagree with the Democrats should offend all who cherish their First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech. The right to speak one’s mind is diminished - and effectively silenced - if it cannot find a voice on the radio, television, or the internet.

The American people should not have to get approval from bureaucrats in Washington before they speak their mind on any given issue. Republicans in the Congress agree with that sentiment - and have taken to heart Voltaire’s famous declaration (”I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it”) by introducing the Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2009.

The bill, introduced January 7, 2009, by Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN), chairman of the House Republican Conference, Congressman Greg Walden (R-OR), Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC), chairman of the Senate Steering Committee, and Senator John Thune (R-SD), Vice Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, would prevent the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from reinstating the Fairness Doctrine, which would suppress free speech by requiring the government to monitor political views and decide what constitutes fair political discourse. The Pence-Walden bill in the House already has over 100 cosponsors including Republican Leader Boehner.

Read the rest of this entry »

Permalink | No Comments »

---

Congress Comes to YouTube (again)…But it Almost Didn’t Happen

Today marks the launch of a new collaborative effort between The U.S. Congress and YouTube.com.  The House Hub and Senate Hub have been developed to make it easier for visitors to find their elected officials and their YouTube channels.  YouTube and other popular technologies continue to empower American citizens with real-time information about the policy debates and actions being undertaken by Congress.

As we see more and more members from both sides of the aisle embrace web video and social media, it’s easy to forget that only a few months ago Democrats on the House Administration Committee were proposing rules that would have brought this free flow of information to a screeching halt.  The proposed rules, including an “approved list” of websites that could be used by members of Congress, would have amounted to new government censorship of the Internet by a panel of federal officials that is neither neutral or independent.

Using the very tools Democrats proposed to restrict, citizens spoke out in the thousands.  Thankfully, House Republicans, led by Reps. Vern Ehlers (R-MI), Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and Tom Price (R-GA), and supported strongly by Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) and Leader Boehner, expressed their strong opposition to this attack on Internet freedom and proposed an alternative solution that would allow Members of Congress to continue posting content at sites of their choosing.  House Republicans’ recommendations were eventually adopted by the Committee on House Administration.

House Republicans will continue fight to increase transparency and openness in government using technology and any other means at our disposal.  If you have any thoughts on how we can better achieve these goals, let us know in the comments or as a video response to Leader Boehner’s welcome video below.

Permalink | 3 Comments »

---

Stimulus Spending Skeptics Speak Out

Since putting out the call for outside economists’ opinions on President-elect Obama’s proposed $1 trillion economic “stimulus” spending plan, we’ve been contacted by dozens of economists and academics eager to add their name to the list of stimulus spending skeptics. Below you will find selected entries from experts that agree that tax relief for families and small businesses, not more government spending, will help to get America’s economy moving again:

Jeffrey Miron
Senior Lecturer and Director of Undergraduate Studies
Department of Economics, Harvard University
http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/miron

Any stimulus package should consist of permanent tax cuts rather than spending increases. The (limited) available evidence suggests that tax cuts are at least as effective as spending increases in stimulating the economy. Tax cuts help reduce the adverse incentives caused by high tax rates. And spending increases are likely to include numerous projects that do not pass normal cost-benefit criteria and are instead merely pork (e.g., repairing bridges to nowhere).

John Seater
Professor of Economics
Economics Dept., NC State Univ.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jjseater/

I worked 7 years as a Federal Reserve staff economist and have done research in and taught macroeconomics for 27 more years. There is no convincing evidence that stimulative fiscal policy is either feasible or effective. The recognition and action lags (ancient terms from the bygone Keynesian era) alone virtually always mean that the stimulus arrives after the recession is over, thus causing an undesirable distortion that impedes recovery…These aspects of fiscal policy have been known for more than a quarter century. However, if one does not like old evidence, Greg Mankiw on his blog recently cited more recent scholarship showing that Keynesian theory is inconsistent with the data. This I am strongly skeptical of President-elect Obama’s plans. Both theory and evidence are against them. What else do we require to reject them?

Michael Keran
Retired, Former Sr. VP & Director of Research
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

Japan in the early and mid 1990s engaged in major fiscal stimulus focused on infrastructure projects with deficits equal to 7-8% of GDP and a cumulative Debt/GDP of almost 150%. None of this led to economic recovery until the late 1990s when the Bank of Japan engaged in quantitative easing of monetary policy and the Government of Japan finally introduced a taxpayer bailout of the banks. The Fed and Treasury in the US have already taken such actions. The Japanese experience suggests that additional fiscal stimulus will only add to the Debt without helping the economy.

Daniel J. Mitchell
Senior Fellow, CATO Institute
http://www.cato.org/people/daniel-mitchell

Permalink | 14 Comments »

---

New Choice for Labor Secretary Supports Secret Ballots For Democrats, Opposes Them for Workers

According to press reports, President-Elect Barack Obama will name Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) as his choice for Labor Secretary later today.

As a member of Congress, Rep. Solis co-sponsored the highly-controversial Employee Free Choice Act, legislation that would end a worker’s right to a secret ballot when deciding whether to join a union.  She also voted for this anti-worker bill when Democrats passed it through the House on March 1, 2007.

However, Rep. Solis took a different tack on secret ballot elections when it came time for internal Democratic Caucus elections.  Specifically, she co-signed a letter criticizing the absence of secret ballots in electing the Congressional Hispanic Caucus leadership on January 5, 2007.  The letter explained:

“… votes by secret ballot were in order but never taken. We therefore believe that we need to follow proper rules of procedure and hold a vote by secret ballot.”

The letter continued:

“[I]t is important that the integrity of the [Congressional Hispanic Caucus] be unquestioned and above reproach.”

So Rep. Solis strongly supports secret ballot elections for Democrats, but opposes them for working Americans.  Ending secret ballots, as Democrats and their Big Labor allies have proposed, would leave workers vulnerable to coercion, pressure, and outright intimidation and threats – from either the management or the union side of the election.  And nearly 80 percent of Americans strongly oppose this bill.

That’s why Republicans are working to preserve the decades-old secret ballot election in the workplace – to prevent workers from being intimidated into doing something they don’t believe is in their best interests.  House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) recently said on Fox News Sunday that Republicans will do everything they can to stop the efforts of Democrats and Big Labor to kill the secret ballot, saying:

“This is, I think, an affront to the American people, and we will do everything we can to stop it.”

Permalink | 4 Comments »

---

12-10-08 Republican Leadership Stakeout

Republican Leader John Boehner and Conference Chairman Rep. Mike Pence discuss the House GOP no-bailout alternative for the American Auto industry.

Permalink | 5 Comments »

---

Card-checkocracy

Today the Chicago Tribune takes a closer look at The Employee Free Choice Act:

Organized labor helped elect Barack Obama and now eagerly awaits his promised support for its top priority—a bill that would make it easier to set up union locals…

The so-called card-check bill would not protect workers and it would not be “free choice.” It would strip away their right to vote in secret, making it more likely they would face intimidation from organizers and other workers. The pressure would be on to check the card, whether or not they actually wanted a union.

It’s clear why union bosses want this law. Union membership ticked up last year, but it has been plunging for half a century….Union leaders prefer to blame the decline on federal labor laws, which they say make it too hard to organize. That’s a pretty flimsy argument. Present law allows the National Labor Relations Board to call for an election by secret ballot after 30 percent of employees at a work site have requested a vote. That’s hardly a high hurdle.

There are ways to recast the nation’s labor laws so workers’ interests are protected, without subjecting them to more intimidation by union organizers…In short, create more incentives for labor and management to negotiate in good faith and preserve the workers’ right to a secret ballot…

The inaptly named Employee Free Choice Act would be good for labor bosses. But it wouldn’t be good for laborers.

Permalink | 2 Comments »

---

Boehner: GOP Firmly Against ‘Card Check’

Featured in tomorrow’s Washington Times:

House Republican Leader John A. Boehner said Democrats’ use of secret ballots to chose its leadership was ironic because the party wants to nix workers’ rights to a secret voting in deciding whether to unionize.

“The secret ballot election is a cornerstone of our American democracy,” Mr. Boehner, Ohio Republican, said Thursday. “If it is good enough for House Democrats to rely on during today’s high-stakes vote, shouldn’t it be good enough for millions of American workers across America who value their workplace privacy?”

He vowed Republicans would stand firmly against the Democrat’s “card-check” legislation - dubbed the Employee Free Choice Act or EFCA. It would allow organizers to unionize a workplace by gathering enough singed cards rather than the current process of employees deciding by secret ballots…

…Enacting the card-check law is a top priority for organized labor and the unions are confident it will be passed by the Democrat-led Congress and signed by President-elect Barack Obama, a top AFL-CIO lobbyist told The Washington Times this week.

“I have no doubt it will pass and will be singed,” AFL-CIO government-affairs director William Samuel said in an exclusive interview.

Mr. Obama and House Democratic leaders supported the bill during House and Senate votes last year.  Critics of the card check process say it leaves workers vulnerable to coercion and intimidation from either the management or the union organizers.

Mr. Boehner highlighted House Democrats’ use of a secret ballot Wednesday in deciding a bitter showdown between two Democratic titans - Rep. Henry A. Waxman of California and Rep. John D. Dingell of Michigan - over control of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

House Democratic Caucus voted 137 to 122 to install the fiercely liberal Mr. Waxman and outs Mr. Dingell, whose close ties to U.S. automakers and the utility industry had put him as odds with the environmental agenda of Democratic leaders, including Mrs. Pelosi.

Mr. Boehner noted that Rep. Louise Slaughter, New York Democrat, earlier in the week expressed relief her vote in the Dingell-Waxman conflict would not be public. “It’s a secret ballot, thank the Lord,” she told Congressional Quarterly.

“Killing secret ballot rights in the workplace may be a priority for the special interests that have placed Democrats in charge of Washington, but it is not in the best interest of workers or our democratic system,” Mr. Boehner said.

Permalink | 5 Comments »

---