Monthly Archives: June 2008

Obama Now a NAFTA Supporter

Now that the primaries are over, Sen. Barack Obama has come out in favor of NAFTA. He told Fortune in an interview that “Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified.”

I’ll say. On the campaign trail he has called NAFTA both “devastating” and “a big mistake.” He also threatened to unilaterally opt out of NAFTA for six months as a prelude to reopening negotiations.

The U.S. economy has added 26 million net jobs since NAFTA took effect in 1994. Inflation-adjusted worker compensation is up 23%.

Obama’s qualified support of free trade is a welcome change. But it makes clear an unfortunate reality. His earlier rhetoric was either misinformed, or intentionally deceitful.

Neither is an appealing characteristic for a potential President.

A Specter Stops Haunting the NFL

The NFL’s Spygate scandal has disappeared from the headlines. Coincidentally, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) has announced that he won’t hold hearings on the matter. I’ve been worried that he would.

There is a cloud in this silver lining, though: “Instead, he said he plans to look into another hot-button issue where sports and politics meet: public financing of sports stadiums.”

It never ends.

A New Regulatory Order?

Harvard economist Larry Summers has some ideas for a new regulatory order in the Financial Times. In typical Summers fashion, his recommendations are moderate. His moderation comes at the cost of ignoring incentives.

His first principle is “no regulatory competition.” Regulators shouldn’t compete against each other. Let’s take this principle to its logical conclusion. Only one regulator would be allowed — that would be the federal government. As with most monopolies, bad incentives abound.

It is a good thing that, say, investment firms are free to move to New Jersey if New York’s regulations are too stringent. Or if taxes are too high; the same arguments apply to tax competition. “Forum shopping” gives regulators more incentive to be reasonable.

Summers also expresses concern over regulatory capture. His concern is legitimate, but there’s no correlation with forum shopping, as he implies. Regulatory capture happens when something is regulated. The only way to stop regulatory capture is to stop regulating, period.

When constructing a regulatory order, we have three choices: 1) no regulators, 2) a single regulator (the federal government), and 3) multiple, competing regulators (the states).

I think I know which I prefer. Failing that, I’ll take the third option.

Shower Curtains: Mankind’s Doom

An environmental group just ran a study that says that shower curtains, of all things, are bad for your health. They “may lead to adverse health effects including respiratory irritation, central nervous system, liver and kidney damage, nausea, headaches and loss of coordination.”

I was surprised to see this. Maybe it’s because I haven’t heard of shower curtains causing any of these symptoms in people. Anywhere. Ever.

ABC News was kind enough to call their bluff. “only one shower curtain — not one brand; one curtain — was subjected to complete testing for chemicals in its composition, as well as those it released into the air.”

The study also neglects the cardinal rule of toxicology: it is the dose that makes the poison. As it turns out, the chemicals detected in the curtains “could be toxic if swallowed or inhaled only in quantities thousands of times greater than those found.”

Usually media outlets eat up this kind of scaremongering with a spoon. Kudos to ABC News for taking the time to check the facts.

Self promotion: I’ve written on a similarly baseless scare story before.

Hat tip: Fark.com

The Economy: Nothing but Doom and Gloom

Reuters reports that jobless claims are at a four-year high. Everybody panic!

Wait a minute, hold on. Context, please. Just how were things back in 2004, the last time jobless claims were this high? It turns out GDP grew by 3.1%. The economy also added 1.989 million net jobs that year. I’ll take numbers like that any day.

Reuters suffers from pessimistic bias, like most media outlets. They assume that the current jump in jobless claims is de facto evidence that the economy is in free-fall. Fortunately for all of us, that claim doesn’t hold up against the data.

FCC to Nullify Millions of Contracts?

My colleague Alex Harris is drooling over the latest version of Apple‘s iPhone. In true CEI spirit he added, “Regulators better not get in my way.” Sorry to say, Alex, but tomorrow the FCC is holding a hearing that may do just that.

Here’s what’s happening. Monthly service is cheap, but phones themselves are expensive. A good one costs hundreds of dollars. Many people can’t afford to buy them outright, or don’t want to. Since phone companies want to sell phones, they’ve found a way around that: spread the cost out over time.

Providers often sell their phones cheaply, sometimes even at a loss. Then they make their money back by locking the customer in for a set period of time, usually a year or two. If the customer wants out before then, they have to pay an early termination fee.

The FCC ‘s hearing tomorrow will discuss ways to regulate early termination fees. The fees are unpopular, even though they allow more people to afford better phones.

Some people have complained because they found out about the fees only after signing a legally-binding contract; not everyone can be bothered to read fine print. The FCC claims it is looking out for these people.

They are not. The fees are a good thing. They lower the cost of entry into the cell phone market. Without early-termination clauses, a lot of people would be priced out of cell phone ownership, period. Others would only be able to afford a low-end phone. The FCC’s proposals would hurt these people.

That doesn’t matter when there’s a chance to be seen “doing something.” Ergo, the FCC is considering violating the sanctity of millions of contracts. In Washington, good publicity trumps the rule of law. I wish it were for a better reason than people not reading what they sign.

Let’s Move Election Day

CNN’s Roland Martin thinks that elections should be held on Saturdays, not Tuesdays. He thinks that would increase turnout.

I have a better idea. Move Election Day to Tax Day — April 15. We can decide who gets to spend our money while our tax bills are still fresh in our minds. Politicians would have less incentive to come up with grandiose schemes for spending other peoples’ money.

Besides, I’ve always thought it borderline suspicious that elections are held at the opposite end of the calendar from when we pay our taxes.

A Small Start

Rep. Anthony Weiner is introducing legislation to make it easier for foreign fashion models to get visas and come to the U.S.

I’m all for it. But why only models? There are millions of other would-be immigrants who deserve a fair shot at coming here, too.

A Bit Late, I Think

Rep. Dennis Kucinich has introduced a resolution to impeach President Bush, whose term expires in seven months.

Kucinich’s other achievement this year is demanding a recount of the New Hampshire presidential primary, where he won 1.4% of the vote.

More politicians should devote themselves to wasting their colleagues’ time like Rep. Kucinich does. The floor time he took up reading the proposed impeachment is time Congress didn’t spend “stimulating” the economy. Kudos to you, sir.

Korea’s Beef Standoff Continues

There were more street protests in Seoul on Sunday over U.S. beef. The public is scared out of their minds that they’ll get mad cow disease. The domestic beef industry doesn’t like having to face competition. President Lee Myung-bak’s approval rating is lower than President Bush’s. The pending U.S.-Korea free trade agreement is under fire.

Will it pass? The Wall Street Journal Asia, in a standout editorial today, thinks so. The beef outcry is a temporary phenomenon, they believe.

“It’s worth noting that the opposition party hasn’t gained any ground at Mr. Lee’s expense, a sign that the public protests may mask broader support for the free-trade agreement.”

Let’s hope they’re right.