It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republicans Remind Obama: Democrats Are Blocking House-Passed Jobs Bills

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
There are certainly some viable opportunities within these bills. Time to get something moving!!! other than Obama's lips!!!! The dems in the Senate won't have any of it...


Republican leaders are reminding President Obama that the House of Representatives has passed more than a dozen "pro-growth" measures to spur job creation, but with one exception, Senate Democrats have refused to consider any of those bills.

In a letter to the president on Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) listed all the House-passed "jobs" bills that are now languishing in the Senate. They include a bill to reduce the regulatory burdens on farmers and small business owners; a bill to block a "job-destroying national energy tax," and a bill to boost offshore energy production.


Here's a novel approach spending reform vs. new spending.... We must change how we spend the money we already have.


Boehner and Cantor also outlined "potential opportunities for Congress and the White House to work together" on job-creation.

An infrastructure initiative is one of those areas: "We are not opposed to initiatives to repair and improve infrastructure," the Republican leaders said, but instead of new spending, they’re calling for spending “reforms,” as follows:


At his point any more speeches from Obama are nothing more than lip service and political tom foolery.

How can anyone argue with this idea. It doesn't have to be permanent but it should last long enough to see our nation through troubled times


"Current law requires that states set-aside 10 percent of their surface transportation funds for transportation enhancements, which must be used for items such as establishment of transportation museums, education activities for pedestrians and bicyclists, acquisition of scenic easements, historic preservation, operation of historic transportation facilities, etc.," Boehner and Cantor noted.

"While many of the initiatives funded by this mandatory set-aside may be worthy projects, eliminating this required set-aside would allow states to devote more money to the types of infrastructure programs you are advocating without adding to the deficit. We believe such a reform would be consistent with your statement last week that we should 'reform the way transportation money is invested, to eliminate waste, to give states more control over the projects that are right for them.'"



The Republican leaders said they would like to meet with President Obama before he gives his “jobs” address to a joint session of Congress on Thursday. Such a meeting – including leaders from both parties -- would give lawmakers “the opportunity to constructively discuss your proposals.”

Boehner and Cantor said they are specifically interested in learning the cost estimates for 212 new regulatory actions planned by the Obama administration.


No one ever discusses the costs of Obama's new and costly regulations. All 212 of them. Costs that hit most small to medium sized businesses below the belt while the larger companies simply pass them on to us!

Full list of bills frozen or killed in the Senate
www.cnsnews.com...




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Cue Democratic partisan rebuttal in .....3...2...1.


**&&*^%&teabaggers**&&^&***

**&&*^%&Perry**&&^&***

**&&*^%&Bachman**&&^&***

**&&*^%&"Caribou Barbie"**&&^&***

edit on 7-9-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
But, they don't create any union jobs. Enough said!



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


I need to see the jobs that were going to be created with these bills before I can have any opinion on it. There have been plenty of "jobs" bills that had nothing about providing jobs in them in the past.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by jibeho
 


I need to see the jobs that were going to be created with these bills before I can have any opinion on it. There have been plenty of "jobs" bills that had nothing about providing jobs in them in the past.


So would I!! It would be nice to have these questions asked in an open forum on the Hill eh? Discussion and open and courteous debate would be refreshing. I'm growing weary of the Usual 3 minute teaser speeches by this administration.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jibeho
 


I see this in one of two lights. 1) obama'll play lip service to it and nothing will be done because it would make the Republicans looks good. And 2nd) and this one scares me. obama doesn't want things to get better, he wants to pull us further down. Ofcourse he's got to act that he's trying, but behind the scenes he wants us to fail.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Democrats do not want to see Republicans succeed. They would rather have the American people suffer than see a viable option pass and put into action buy the Republicans. This is politics, and this is why USA is suffering. Remove the democratic party, removes recession.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Obamas in campaign mode, hes not going to let these bills pass because he doesnt want any of the credit to go the republicans, especially with his sinking approval ratings. unfortunetley this strategy hasnt worked because hes waited almost a month to give his own jobs plan and still hasnt even announced what that is yet.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kozmo
But, they don't create any union jobs. Enough said!


But if any union jobs were created, the unions would get right on the task of making them so expensive that the new jobs would end up overseas - just like the old union jobs.




posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kellynap43
Democrats do not want to see Republicans succeed. They would rather have the American people suffer than see a viable option pass and put into action buy the Republicans. This is politics, and this is why USA is suffering. Remove the democratic party, removes recession.


I'm going to replace the words "republican" with "democrat" and the word "democrat with "republican"


Republicans do not want to see Democrats succeed. They would rather have the American people suffer than see a viable option pass and put into action buy the Democrats. This is politics, and this is why USA is suffering. Remove the republican party, removes recession.


Yep, this sounds like it fits also


Not sure why you think one side or the other is right. Guess it's just me thinking ALL politicians are in it for them selves and are more than happy to screw the American public.

By the way, I swing more toward the republican side....in case that is important to you.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho
There are certainly some viable opportunities within these bills. Time to get something moving!!! other than Obama's lips!!!! The dems in the Senate won't have any of it...


Republican leaders are reminding President Obama that the House of Representatives has passed more than a dozen "pro-growth" measures to spur job creation, but with one exception, Senate Democrats have refused to consider any of those bills.

In a letter to the president on Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) listed all the House-passed "jobs" bills that are now languishing in the Senate. They include a bill to reduce the regulatory burdens on farmers and small business owners; a bill to block a "job-destroying national energy tax," and a bill to boost offshore energy production.



The only thing honest in this OP is the fact that the author of the article had brief spasm of honesty and put "pro-growth" in quatation marks.


The Republican led congress has proposed fewer bills in its first 9 months than any other Congress in the past century.

It took some digging to find the actual bills that they listed but I found it here.

www.scribd.com...

(1) H.R. 872: Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011
To amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to clarify Congressional intent regarding the regulation of the use of pesticides in or near navigable waters, and for other purposes.

www.govtrack.us...

How does letting farmers not worry about polluting water systems and local drinking water create jobs?

(2) H.R. 910: Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011

To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes.

The rest are just more of the same.

Someone please explain to me how allowing people to pollute more creates jobs?

Companies REPEATEDLY and LOUDLY explain their reasons for not hiring. Nobody but the Koch Brothers are complaining that regulations to protect consumers is holding them back.

This is the most insanely illogical, frankly stupid aspect of the GOPs rhetoric...that if we just let companies pollute our water and air this country will get back to work.

From the Koch Brothers lips to the Speakers mouth.
edit on 7-9-2011 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by occy30

Originally posted by kellynap43
Democrats do not want to see Republicans succeed. They would rather have the American people suffer than see a viable option pass and put into action buy the Republicans. This is politics, and this is why USA is suffering. Remove the democratic party, removes recession.


I'm going to replace the words "republican" with "democrat" and the word "democrat with "republican"


Republicans do not want to see Democrats succeed. They would rather have the American people suffer than see a viable option pass and put into action buy the Democrats. This is politics, and this is why USA is suffering. Remove the republican party, removes recession.


Yep, this sounds like it fits also


Not sure why you think one side or the other is right. Guess it's just me thinking ALL politicians are in it for them selves and are more than happy to screw the American public.

By the way, I swing more toward the republican side....in case that is important to you.



Sorry. History major. Have the tendency to research what history tells us. I look at it this way.
Democrats- want a more socialist government. I think we can both agree.
Republicans- want more capitalism, less regulations, more competition. Tell me if I’m wrong.

Now with that said, were discussing what is more right. Which system will allow us to reach our true potential? Which will bring us out of debt and provide us with many more years of success and prosperity in the future?

I could list several examples here but will simply state. There have been many more successful governments economically who proceeded with capitalism. There have been very very few successful governments under Socialism. Case in point, Vietnam, North Korea, USSR, Cuba, etc.

Now which way is more right? Socialism or Capitalism. It’s that simple. And I simply won’t believe you when you say you lean towards one direction, that means nothing to me. Look at the facts and you decide, I won't tell you what to believe one way or the other.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   
I am still waiting for even one example of the jobs supposed to be created by any of these bills.
Either the OP is blatantly dishonest or that answer is coming?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by jibeho

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by jibeho
 


I need to see the jobs that were going to be created with these bills before I can have any opinion on it. There have been plenty of "jobs" bills that had nothing about providing jobs in them in the past.


So would I!! It would be nice to have these questions asked in an open forum on the Hill eh? Discussion and open and courteous debate would be refreshing. I'm growing weary of the Usual 3 minute teaser speeches by this administration.


Um uh....


Then what the hell is the point of your OP if just a few posts later you are going to agree with me it is bullcrap?



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


You obviously don't run a small business. The regulations are fine sounding - they are purposefull titled to suggest, as you ably do that canceling them means that you are supporting polution.

I have a friend who runs a machine shop and employees 12-15 folks. He uses a number of chemicals in his business as well as has waste to dispose of.

He is required to catalog all receipts of specific chemicals, all on different forms, according to class. Those need to be sent into the state and federal EPA. He further needs to keep copies of them for 7 years.

He needs to back into the volume of chemicals based on his production. X number of Y and x ounces of chemical z on this day, the next. The percentages need to align as well. For every 10 ounces of this, he uses 5 ounces of that. It all needs to pencil together. All of that needs to jive with the amount that he has recorded he has received.

Separate form for waste. Need to explain where the waste went, why it was wasted. Different forms to different groups within the EPA. All of the waste tied back it the forms described above.

He has to be prepared for an audit. Audits are unannounced and take an enormous amount of time. He needs to explain his record keeping strategy and policies. He needs to walk through his facilities and explain his work procedures and how exceptions that relate to specific chemicals are conducted. He needs to show and explain his employee training materials and demonstrate that everyone has been trained. If he gets audited and he has 4 of the last 7 years, it will cost him at least a day. They take the paperwork and come back with findings and "action" steps that he needs to take. Most of them are bs, like he has not revised his training manual in 3 years or the kid who sweeps out the shop has not been trained in a specific procedure despite the fact that he would never do that procedure, stuff like that.

Every private business works hard every day to make themselves easier to do business with. The government has done nothing to ease its engagement. Now this gent is paying for the EPA to exist. Does that entitle him to be treated with respect and as a client? Nope. Does it give him the benefit of the doubt, that he is an honest guy, looking to do the right thing and not purposefully tossing chemicals down a storm drain? No. Everyone of these audit engagements are hostile from the get go, despite the fact that he's never failed an audit.

He attempted to expand his business to take on more volume. It would have enabled him to make more money and put 8-10 more folks to work with good jobs. It would also have employeed contractors to build the facility as well as bolstered the local commercial real estate market by his purchasing the adjacent building. After three years of attempting to get the permits, he gave up.

The regulations change so frequently that it is close to impossible to get the permits approved. One of the most absurd was the requirement to install handicapped friendly bathrooms in his machine shop, despite the fact that the work is impossible to do for someone in a wheel chair.

It all sounds benign and it all sounds logical - until you actually have to comply with this nonsense.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by jibeho

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by jibeho
 


I need to see the jobs that were going to be created with these bills before I can have any opinion on it. There have been plenty of "jobs" bills that had nothing about providing jobs in them in the past.


So would I!! It would be nice to have these questions asked in an open forum on the Hill eh? Discussion and open and courteous debate would be refreshing. I'm growing weary of the Usual 3 minute teaser speeches by this administration.


Um uh....


Then what the hell is the point of your OP if just a few posts later you are going to agree with me it is bullcrap?


Like I said I want the discussion to be held on the congressional floor. Let them debate it and let us discuss it. Stop playing coy with your trivial replies and jabs at me. I made the assumption that you could have a civil discussion. Ooops!

Be certain of one thing. The Government does NOT create jobs or wealth. (unless your in congress) Our nation needs a structure that fosters investment, and innovation. We need to open the proper doors to foreign trade and properly restrict the trade that can harm our nation the most.

212 new regulations from this administration piled on top of the litany of existing regulations. Its stifling!!!



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5
Someone please explain to me how allowing people to pollute more creates jobs?


That is all in how you define pollution.

The company I work for has to heat metal to a high temperature (850 degrees F.), then we have to cool it down at a specified rate. We use chilled water to do this. We obtain the water from a pond on our site that is fed by a small stream. We do nothing to contaminate this water, it is a closed system with no chemicals involved. As a matter of fact we use no chemicals in our process, so there is no way for this water to be contaminated. With these new regulations, we have to have this water tested several times per day to PROVE that there are no chemicals. These tests are expensive and will add to the costs of our product, where we already have a slim profit margin. We WERE looking at expanding (adding about 30 jobs), but, we cannot until the EPA specifies what the regulation on water testing will be.

We are not the only company that is in this situation. There is your answer.



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Obama Has No Plan, Except To Pump Money Into The Unions and Their Thugs!
There is a vote that is coming up to rain-in the National Labor Board and their policies catering to Unions and the States that Unions Jobs.

House to Vote on Bill to Protect Jobs from Reckless Overreach by Administration’s National Labor Relations Board



Here is an example:

President Obama will appear before a joint session of Congress to deliver a speech that White House Press Secretary Jay Carney says will include “some new proposals that you have not heard us talk about.” If the President is serious about putting Americans back to work, his agenda should include a commitment to work with Republicans to stop his National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) from destroying new jobs - as it is currently doing in South Carolina – an issue we have indeed “not heard” the White House talk about.


That right, who here as heard about the NLRB and South Carolina?

The NLRB’s recent case against Boeing – which could cost an estimated 1,000 jobs in South Carolina – underscores the need to rein in the power of unelected bureaucrats whose actions would not only hurt South Carolinians, but would have a chilling effect on job creators nationwide. Secretary of Commerce nominee John Bryson acknowledged the risks at a recent hearing, saying that the NLRB’s decision was “not the right judgment,” and recognizing that such action could have the effect of “putting those jobs outside the U.S.”


Yes, Folks it is the Nasty Republicans fighting the Unions to Create Jobs.

The new House majority has been focused on jobs since day one, and will continue moving that effort forward with the Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act. Republicans have put forth a Plan for America’s Job Creators that is focused on removing barriers to job growth – including Washington’s excessive regulations and government overreach - so businesses can start hiring again. Learn more about the plan here: Jobs.GOP.Gov, and tune in here to watch the committee’s action on the Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act tomorrow at 10:00 am EST.




“No government board should have the authority to tell a private employer where it can run a business. … It would be irresponsible for Congress to stand by and watch as this threat to job creation undermines the strength of our economy. … With more than 14 million unemployed, we have a responsibility to protect workers and foster an environment for economic growth and prosperity.”

Source: www.speaker.gov...

Here is another Good Read:

Republicans Introduce Legislation to Prevent NLRB From Dictating Location of American Jobs


Source: edworkforce.house.gov...

I Believe when you remove the Government involvement in Businesses Big and Small, You can create jobs, the Unions were needed earlier in Americans work force, yes, Greed was rampant. But todays young CEO's
have a better understanding of America and it's Economy. They also want Americans to prosper.

That's just my 2 cents, coming from a Communist Country and now seeing how China as a growing middle class
mainly because, China's Government has relaxed it tight grip on the Chinese People.
Let our Citizens make up our own minds on who we wish to work for, Unions or Non-Union. But let the Companies Built where it is best for them.
I'm Sorry, I was Ranting.
edit on 7-9-2011 by guohua because: spelling

edit on 7-9-2011 by guohua because: Spelling and links

edit on 7-9-2011 by guohua because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
Has Obama passed a budget yet let alone any other legislation? He was in control of both houses?
I guess it must be Bush's fault or the evil Republicans? Is he finally going to have a budget passed next year and will it include the past years he did not have a budget?
Obama is trying to pass a spending bill, it should be blocked. Change the name but it is still stimulus/bailouts, or whatever you want to call it, I haven't seen any benefit to the people from it except to Wall street and the banks.
edit on 9/7/2011 by mugger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by Indigo5
 


You obviously don't run a small business.


As a matter of fact I do.


Originally posted by dolphinfan
The regulations are fine sounding - they are purposefull titled to suggest, as you ably do that canceling them means that you are supporting polution.

I have a friend who runs a machine shop and employees 12-15 folks. He uses a number of chemicals in his business as well as has waste to dispose of.

He is required to catalog all receipts of specific chemicals, all on different forms, according to class. Those need to be sent into the state and federal EPA. He further needs to keep copies of them for 7 years.

.............

It all sounds benign and it all sounds logical - until you actually have to comply with this nonsense.


I know about compliance and regulations for a Machine Shop. My brother-in-law runs one and what you describe is a regulatory process for a large hazardous chemical manufacturer, not a machine shop, unless your buddy uses and ungodly amount of hazardous chemicals?

Geez, is this your buddies machine shop?...I mean Superfund site? I wonder if the families drinking this carcinogen feel like the EPA is “nonsense”?

EPA declares contaminated area in Hillsborough a Superfund site
By Susan Green, Times Correspondent
In Print: Friday, January 21, 2011

The Florida Department of Health detected high levels of tetrachloroethylene, also known as PCE, a few years ago in 12 of 28 wells within a quarter-mile radius of the machine shop. The chemical, widely associated with dry cleaning operations, is a solvent that was used at the machine shop to take grease off parts.


www.tampabay.com...




top topics



 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join