A recent article on NationalReview.com, “Obama and the Regulators,” by Andrew Stiles examines the results of an eight-month government-wide review designed to reduce regulatory impact on businesses. Every federal department was ordered to put forward a plan to do away with red tape. Now that those plans have been unveiled, the administration has promised an additional round of reviews, a process that White House officials claim is “likely” to save at least $10 billion over five years and create an unspecified number of jobs, writes Stiles.
Even if that $10 billion estimate holds true, it would cover just a fraction of the $65 billion in total costs imposed by the nearly 350 new federal regulations introduced since beginning of this year alone, according to an analysis by Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY).
As the article states: Members of the business community met this effort with the equivalent of an obligatory golf clap, as one applauds a beleagured player who finally taps in for triple bogey.
Stiles’ article has also drawn feedback from members of the Ag Retailers Association (ARA). “An interesting article in the National Review explains why the real impact of this effort will likely have a very minimal impact on reducing the regulatory burden on business,” posted Michelle Hummel, ARA’s director of marketing & communications, on the association’s online forum. “All of this follows President Obama’s recent visit to Illinois where he dismissed farmers’ concerns about excessive regulations as ‘rumors ginned up by lobbyists and associations in D.C.’”
Steve Taylor, president of the Missouri Agribusiness Association, responded: “From the National Review article, I guess EPA somehow considers this an economic stimulus,” he commented. “I think most reasonable people consider this a drag on our economy and stalling economic growth.”
To read the full discussion on ARA’s online forum and/or to reply to it, click here.