In the Crosshairs: The Business Community’s Free Speech Rights

By David Kinkade  |  U.S. Chamber of Commerce  |  April 7, 2014

On her recent visit to China, First Lady Michelle Obama spoke movingly in defense of free expression, noting that in the United States, she and President Obama are frequent targets of criticism—and she wouldn’t have it any other way.

“It's not always easy, but we wouldn't trade it for anything in the world,” the first lady said in a speech that won plaudits. “Because time and again, we have seen that countries are stronger and more prosperous when the voices of and opinions of all their citizens can be heard.”

It was a powerful endorsement of one of the foundational values of the American political system. And it should serve as a reminder to those in the United States who seek to undermine that rich tradition by clamping down on the free speech rights of business leaders in public debates.

Among the key offenders: the federal government. In recent years, the business community has found itself on the receiving end of a campaign to silence political speech—a campaign misleadingly packaged as “reform.”

EPA’s Attempt to “Set the Record Straight” on Our Carbon Report

By Matt Latourneau  |  U.S. Chamber of Commerce  |  May 28, 2014

Apparently, the Energy Institute’s report detailing the economic impacts of potential carbon regulations has gotten the Administration’s attention.  Considering EPA is about to propose the largest, most costly and most significant rule in its history, we consider that a good thing.

So let’s take a look at EPA’s response, from Associate Administrator for External Affairs Tom Reynolds:

First, before EPA even put pen to paper to draft the proposed standards, we gathered an unprecedented amount of input and advice through hundreds of meetings with hundreds of groups—including many members of the Chamber.  That input fed into the draft proposal we’ll release on June 2, and we plan to kick off a second phase of engagement as we work through the draft and get to a reasonable, meaningful final rule.

Indeed, the U.S. Chamber and our members have been engaged with EPA for years in an attempt to improve EPA’s regulations.  However, it should be noted that EPA’s much heralded “listening sessions” to receive input on potential carbon regulations completely avoided the ten states that are most dependent on coal for electricity.  As the leaders of 13 state chambers of commerce noted to EPA last fall, the public engagement tour included cities such as San Francisco, New York, and Boston while avoiding areas of the country that will be most affected.

We take EPA at its word that they want input from industry on their rules, and that was part of the reason why we decided months ago to embark on a project to produce a comprehensive, transparent analysis of how potential regulations could impact the economy.

Double Whammy: EPA Carbon Regulations Will Mean Higher Electricity Costs, Fewer Jobs

By Sean Hackbarth  |  U.S. Chamber of Commerce  |  May 28, 2014

Next week, it’s expected that President Obama will personally announce EPA’s latest effort to transform how America generates electricity. Remember in 2008, when Candidate Barack Obama said, electricity prices would “skyrocket?” This is what he meant, and it will affect every element of economic activity.

What is EPA about to do?

Next week, EPA will release carbon emission regulations for already-existing power plants. It’s a follow-up to last-year’s proposed regulations on new power plants.

How damaging could these regulations be on our economy?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for 21st Century Energy released a report, “Assessing the Impact of Proposed New Carbon Regulations in the United States,” prepared with the assistance of the global energy and economics firm IHS. The analysis found that by 2030 potential new carbon regulations could:

• Cost as many as 442,000 jobs in 2022 and put 224,000 Americans out of work, on average, annually
• Cost $51 billion in GDP loss annually
• Lower disposable household income by 586 billion
• Increase electricity costs by more than $289 billion.

The report is based on an existing plan developed by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Obama administration's previously-announced goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 42% of 2005 levels by 2030. “We considered it as close as we could get to what the administration would be unveiling next week,” Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the Energy Institute said at a press conference.

Harbert added, “Americans deserve to have an accurate picture of the costs and benefits associated with the administration's plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions through unprecedented and aggressive EPA regulations.”

Father Gets Probation For Making Son Walk Home From School

The Daily Caller  |  May 30, 2014

A Hawaii man has been sentenced to a year of probation after making his son walk a mile home from school.

Robert Demond was convicted of a misdemeanor charge of second-degree endangering the welfare of a minor.

Demond explained that his son had been involved in some sort of rule-breaking at school. When Demond picked him up, he asked about it, but his son refused to respond. Demond then stopped the car and told his son to walk to rest of the way home to think about what he had done, reports the Garden Island.

The judge, Kathleen Watanabe, ruled that the punishment was “old-fashioned” and inappropriate. She said that it is dangerous for children to walk alongside the road due to potential pedophiles. It was a form of punishment no longer supported by the community.

Demond was sentenced to a $200 fine and a year of probation. His son’s age was never revealed in court documents.

Utilities Size Up Emission Cap for Power Plants

• "New federal limits on greenhouse-gas emissions would force sweeping changes in the U.S. electric system but wouldn't deliver the knockout blow to coal that mining companies and some power producers had feared."

• "The overall costs of the plan remain hotly debated. The administration estimates that utilities would spend as much as $8.8 billion a year to comply with the rule, based on complex assumptions including using more natural gas as a baseload fuel. "

• "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce says the rule would cost the economy $50 billion a year."

Utilities Size Up Emission Cap for Power Plants

By Amy Harder and Cassandra Sweet  |  The Wall Street Journal  |  June 2, 2014

New federal limits on greenhouse-gas emissions would force sweeping changes in the U.S. electric system but wouldn't deliver the knockout blow to coal that mining companies and some power producers had feared.

The proposed caps on carbon emissions, unveiled by the Environmental Protection Agency on Monday, give both states and utilities credit for reductions they already have made, including moving from coal to more natural gas and deploying renewable energy. Burning gas produces less carbon than coal, and natural gas has become cheap and plentiful during the past few years because of the U.S. energy boom.

The EPA's plan, part of President Barack Obama's broader effort to combat climate change, also allows states to count measures like energy-efficiency programs to meet a nationwide goal of reducing 2005 greenhouse-gas emission levels by an average of 25% by 2020 and 30% by 2030.

Scott Segal of Bracewell & Giuliani LLP in Washington, D.C., who lobbies on behalf of coal-fired power plants, said he opposes the carbon plan but said the rule "could have been a whole lot worse."

The 645-page proposal is so complex that companies said they were trying to sort out the potential impacts, which are likely to vary widely by region. Coal consumption is highest in the Midwest, the Ohio Valley and the Southeast, including Florida and Georgia, and coal-burning states tend to have lower electricity prices.

EPA's plan to cut carbon emissions could shift energy mix

• "The Environmental Protection Agency calls for a 30% national cut in power-plant emissions by 2030."

• "The EPA projects annual compliance costs of $7.3 billion to $8.8 billion by 2030, but since the proposal is expected to reduce air pollution, it says annual public health benefits will total $55 billion to $93 billion by avoiding up to 100,000 asthma attacks and 2,100 heart attacks each year."

EPA's plan to cut carbon emissions could shift energy mix

By Wendy Koch  |  USA Today  |  June 2, 2014

The Obama administration's historic plan to reduce carbon emissions from existing power plants, unveiled Monday, could hasten the nation's shift from coal toward natural gas, energy efficiency and renewable sources such as wind and solar.

The controversial proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency calls for a 30% national cut in power-plant emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide — below 2005 levels — by 2030, but it gives states varying reduction goals, depending on their power mix.

The 645-page plan, a key pillar of President Obama's climate initiative, requires states to develop and implement plans for meeting their targets. Recognizing that coal-fired facilities emit more carbon than other power plants, the administration plan sets lower 2030 targets for some states that rely heavily on coal, such as West Virginia, than those such as New York, with a more diversified energy mix.

"The U.S. energy sector is in transition, anyway," and the plan's rollout over the next 15 years will help to "shape" that shift in a low-carbon direction that addresses climate concerns, says Tim Profeta, director of Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environment Policy Solutions.

The nation's energy industry has dramatically shifted toward natural gas in recent years as new drilling techniques have lowered its production costs. Power plants fueled by natural gas produced 30% of U.S. electricity in 2012 — up from 16% in 2000. Plunging prices for solar panels and wind turbines have also prompted a surge in renewable energy.

Illinois Legislative Recap

Legislative Recap: What Lawmakers Did & Didn't Do

By Bill Wheelhouse & Associated Press  |  WUIS.org  |  June 2, 2014

The Illinois Legislature adjourned its spring session having passed a new state budget and other key measures, but leaving some business undone. Here's a look at what passed and what didn't:
    
BILLS SENT TO GOV. PAT QUINN:

Budget: A roughly $35.7 billion budget for 2015 keeps funding flat for schools and most state agencies. Majority Democrats acknowledged the budget is ``incomplete'' because it postpones tough votes about whether to slash spending or find new revenue until after November's election.

Capital construction: The bill to provide $1 billion for road and bridge projects surfaced in the final days of the session and passed with bipartisan support. It will use money from a prior capital plan.

Ballot measures: Looking to drive voter turnout, majority Democrats approved multiple nonbinding referendums for the November ballot. Among them: Asking voters whether Illinois' minimum wage should be increased, an extra tax on millionaires should be imposed and prescription drug coverage plans should be required to include birth control.

7 Reasons You’ll Retire Poor

1. You’re too busy keeping up with the Joneses

2. You’re not saving enough money

3. Your savings priorities are all wrong

4. You save your money in the wrong accounts

5. You finance everything

6. You’ve let your credit score go

7. You’re a chicken when it comes to investments


7 Reasons You’ll Retire Poor

By MaryaleneLaPonsie  |  MoneyTalksNews  |  May 28, 2014

How’s that retirement fund going?

If you’re like nearly half of workers, you may have doubts about whether you’ll have enough tucked away to avoid spending your final years living off ramen noodles.

According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute 2014 Retirement Confidence Survey, 43 percent of respondents say they are not too or not at all confident they’ll have enough money for their golden years.

The reasons can vary considerably, but if you make the following seven mistakes, you’re virtually guaranteed to retire poor.

1. You’re too busy keeping up with the Joneses

You can’t spend your whole life pretending to be rich and then think you’ll retire rich too.

Living within your means isn’t glamorous, but it is smart. And being smart is what will make you a wealthy retiree.

Rather than upgrading your smartphone every two years and your car every three, try being content with what you have. It doesn’t matter if all your friends are remodeling their kitchens, if yours works perfectly fine, leave it be.

Having a realistic budget is the first step toward living within your means. If you don’t already have one, read Stacy Johnson’s advice on how to create an effortless budget you’ll stick to.

Report Finds V.A. Hid Waiting Lists at Hospitals

• The Department of Veterans Affairs inspector general reported "that 1,700 patients at the veterans medical center in Phoenix were not placed on the official waiting list for doctors’ appointments and may never have received care.

• "The scathing report by Richard J. Griffin, the acting inspector general, validates allegations raised by whistle-blowers and others that Veterans Affairs officials in Phoenix employed artifices to cloak long waiting times for veterans seeking medical care."

• "Mr. Griffin said the average waiting time in Phoenix for initial primary care appointments, 115 days, was nearly five times as long as what the hospital’s administrators had reported."

• "He suggested that the falsified data may have led to more favorable performance reviews for hospital personnel, and he indicated that some instances of potentially manipulated data had been turned over to the Justice Department."

Severe Report Finds V.A. Hid Waiting Lists at Hospitals

By Richard A. Oppel, Jr. and Michael D. Shear  |  New York Times  |  May 28, 2014

In the first confirmation that Department of Veterans Affairs administrators manipulated medical waiting lists at one and possibly more hospitals, the department’s inspector general reported on Wednesday that 1,700 patients at the veterans medical center in Phoenix were not placed on the official waiting list for doctors’ appointments and may never have received care.

The scathing report by Richard J. Griffin, the acting inspector general, validates allegations raised by whistle-blowers and others that Veterans Affairs officials in Phoenix employed artifices to cloak long waiting times for veterans seeking medical care. Mr. Griffin said the average waiting time in Phoenix for initial primary care appointments, 115 days, was nearly five times as long as what the hospital’s administrators had reported.

He suggested that the falsified data may have led to more favorable performance reviews for hospital personnel, and he indicated that some instances of potentially manipulated data had been turned over to the Justice Department.

Mr. Griffin said that similar kinds of manipulation to hide long and possibly growing waiting times were “systemic throughout” the sprawling Veterans Affairs health care system, with its 150 medical centers serving eight million veterans each year. The inspector general’s office is reviewing practices at 42 Veterans Affairs medical facilities.

State Dept. apologizes for promoting Muslim cleric who backed killing of US soldiers

• Ugh!  Does any  pay attention to details?

State Dept. apologizes for promoting Muslim cleric who backed killing of US soldiers

By Adam Kredo  |  Washington Free Beacon  |  May 27, 2014

The State Department’s Counter Terrorism (CT) Bureau apologized on Tuesday for promoting a controversial Muslim scholar whose organization has reportedly backed Hamas and endorsed a fatwa authorizing the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

The apology came on the heels of a Friday Washington Free Beacon report detailing the CT Bureau’s promotion of Sheik Abdallah Bin Bayyah, the vice president of a radical Muslim scholars group that was founded by a radical Muslim Brotherhood leader who has called “for the death of Jews and Americans.”

Bin Bayyah himself is one of several clerics who endorsed a 2004 fatwa, or religious order, endorsing the killing of U.S. soldiers fighting in Iraq.

The CT Bureau apologized multiple times on Tuesday for tweeting in favor of Bin Bayyah and promoting an article on his website.

“This should not have been tweeted and has since been deleted,” the CT Bureau tweeted at users who expressed anger over the original message.