Obama, not Romney, is the Outsourcer-in-Chief
Despite the fact that Obama's own policies have wiped out countless jobs and resulted in other jobs moving to foreign countries, the Obama campaign today accused Mitt Romney of being the "Outsourcer-in-Chief." That was deeply ironic, because the Obama Administration has spent billions of tax dollars subsidizing the outsourcing of American jobs to foreign countries. Obama, not Romney, is the Outsourcer-in-Chief.
of all green-jobs spending in Obama’s $800 billion stimulus package
went to foreign companies, with the largest payment going to a bankrupt
Australian company. For example, the Obama Administration spent $1.6
billion on Chinese and other foreign wind power. The practical effect of
those subsidies was to outsource American jobs. ABC News reported on the subsidies for Chinese wind turbines contained in the stimulus package:
Despite all the talk of green jobs, the overwhelming
majority of stimulus money spent on wind power has gone to foreign
companies, according to a new report by the Investigative Reporting
Workshop at the American University’s School of Communication in
Nearly $2 billion . . . has been spent on wind power. . .But the
study found that nearly 80 percent of that money has gone to foreign
manufacturers of wind turbines.
“Most of the jobs are going overseas,” said Russ Choma at
the Investigative Reporting Workshop. He analyzed which foreign firms
had accepted the most stimulus money. “According to our estimates, about
6,000 jobs have been created overseas, and maybe a couple hundred have
been created in the U.S.” Even with the infusion of so much stimulus
money, a recent report by American Wind Energy Association showed a drop
in U.S. wind manufacturing jobs last year.
The stimulus package showered money on left-wing community organizers and liberal lobbying groups.
NewsMax reported on a $2 billion subsidized loan by the U.S. government to a Brazilian oil company:
Gulf Oil CEO Joe Petrowski says President Barack Obama’s weekend
comments in Brazil that the United States looks forward to purchasing
oil drilled for offshore by that nation “is rather puzzling,” and
“hypocritical” as his administration has imposed a virtual moratorium on
domestic drilling. The signal to purchase more foreign oil comes after
the U.S. Export-Import Bank invested more than $2 billion with Brazil’s
state-owned oil company, Petrobras, to finance exploration.
The CEO of General Electric, which received government “green jobs” money, is a close Obama adviser.
GE has been busy outsourcing American jobs, eliminating a fifth of its
U.S. workforce since 2002. GE made $14.2 billion in profits in 2010,
but paid no taxes
at all, even though America’s corporate tax rates are among the highest
in the world. Indeed, GE actually received a tax benefit of $3.2
billion from the government in 2010, and received a preferential bailout at taxpayer expense.
In addition to paying for foreign “green” jobs that replaced American
jobs, Obama’s stimulus package also contained poorly-designed
provisions that ignited trade wars, wiping out jobs
in America’s export sector and aggravating the U.S. trade deficit. The
Dodd-Frank financial law passed in 2010 is also expected to shift thousands of jobs from America to foreign countries.
The Obama Administration has also given companies an incentive to
move overseas by interfering with employers’ merit-based hiring, and by imposing a wide array of costly, harmful new labor and employment regulations on American manufacturers. Democratic businessman Steve Wynn called Obama
“the greatest wet blanket to business and progress and job creation in
my lifetime,” saying that “the business community in this country is
frightened to death of the weird political philosophy of the President
of the United States. And until he’s gone, everybody’s going to be
sitting on their thumbs.”
The Obama administration is reinterpreting federal labor, employment,
disabilities-rights, and discrimination laws in ways that impose costly
burdens on businesses and consumers. The Obama EEOC recently sued Pepsi for doing criminal background checks on job applicants, forcing it to pay $3.1 million to settle the lawsuit. The EEOC is also threatening employers who require high-school diplomas with lawsuits under the ADA.
Employers’ ability to hire and fire based on merit is under assault
by Obama appointees at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC), an agency that has recently ordered employers to discard useful
employment tests and retain incompetent employees. For example, a hotel
chain was recently compelled to pay $132,500 for dismissing an autistic
desk clerk who did not do his job properly, in order for it avoid a
lawsuit by the EEOC that would have cost it much more than that to
defend. The EEOC has sued companies
that sensibly refuse to employ truck drivers with a history of heavy
drinking, even though companies that hire them will be sued under state
personal-injury laws when they have an accident. It has previously sued other employers who
take serious criminal records into account, or use criminal background
checks, even though employers who hire criminals end up getting sued
when those employees commit crimes. The EEOC’s demands thus place
employers in an impossible dilemma where they can be sued no matter what
they do. The EEOC’s aggressive anti-business stance reflects its new
left-wing majority under the Obama administration, which has appointed
anti-business extremists to the EEOC.
News & Politics