Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis appeared Thursday on the public radio program, the Diane Rehm Show, interviewed by guest host Frank Sesno. The day’s economic news, a rise in the 3rd Quarter GDP, and unemployment were big topics.

The odd thing about the discussion was Secretary Solis’ overreliance on talking points about “green jobs,” hybrid vehicles and renewable energy. It sounded as if the Obama Administration thinks U.S. manufacturing should reorient itself to federally subsidized green jobs and nothing but.

There’s more to manufacturing!

Solis: [I] think there are going to be new opportunities too. For example, yesterday a visit I had in Las Vegas with Nevada Energy, through the smart grid we’re making moneys available, $138 million, to help jump start a new infrastructure there that will allow consumers in that state to be able to monitor and meter their use of energy, electricity, which means a great deal for Nevada because, you know, the extreme hot weather there during the summer and also right now as we get into winter, obviously cooling trends. But if people can have information to be available to know how they’re using, consuming energy and how they work to reduce those high costs themselves, that’s a big incentive for all of us.

Sesno: I want to talk more about the whole smart grid and green energy and all of that in a moment, but you mentioned Nevada. Nevada has been slammed, of course, because the property values there have just fallen through the floor, home sales have been stifled, and the tourism industry has taken a big hit because of the rest of the economy as well. So with that particular example, that money you were talking about, does that create in the short term more jobs for Nevada?

Solis: Well, it will, because there will be at least 200 jobs that will be created for individuals who’ll need to be trained in the reading of these new meters that are going to be ….

Sesno…That’s a start…

Solis …situated

Sesno: But that’s still a drop in the bucket

Solis: No. Well, it’s a start, but what happens is there’s additional retail activity that has to happen, or will happen, because people will be purchasing different pieces of equipment that you can attach to your refrigerator that will serve as a thermostat, and that will happen. There will be accountants that have to be hired. There will business managers, there will have to be warehouse people hired, people in trucking industry, they’ll have to help us transport.

We’ve transcribed more from the interview here.

Green jobs? Good. We like them. But they’re not a panacea, and judging from the examples Secretary Solis cited in the interview, the Administration seems to favor the green jobs that require heavy federal subsidies.

(Edited Saturday for grammar.)

Along with implementing the overreaching Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act, the Consumer Product Safety Commission’s other priority this year has been addressing public complaints about contaminated Chinese drywall. The housing boom and post-Katrina reconstruction led to a shortage of domestic drywall, with imports of the Chinese product filling the gap. But the Chinese drywall has reportedly caused health problems in the people who live or work in the buildings — especially across southern states where the product is more prevalent.

On Thursday, the CPSC and other federal agencies released the initial results of a round of tests on domestic and imported drywall. The key findings:

The study found that sulfur gases were either not present or were present in only limited or occasional concentrations inside the homes, and only when outdoor levels of sulfur compounds in the air were elevated.

The indoor air study did lead to a preliminary finding of detectable concentrations of two known irritant compounds, called acetaldehyde and formaldehyde. These irritant compounds were detected in homes both with and without Chinese drywall, and at concentrations that could worsen conditions such as asthma in sensitive populations, when air conditioners were not working or turned off. The levels of formaldehyde were not unusual for new homes and were higher in homes where air conditioners were not working or turned off.

Although formaldehyde was found, when the air conditioning was turned on, it was not at levels that have been found to cause health symptoms.

The CPSC is quick to emphasize that these are only initial findings, reports continue to come in, and there is much more work to do. The commission has developed a good website with resources, the Drywall Information Center.

For now, we’ll say Chairman Inez Tenenbaum delivered good remarks in Beijing on Monday at the U.S.-China Consumer Product Safety Summit:

The seriousness of this issue can not be underestimated. I appeal to companies in the Chinese drywall supply chain to examine carefully their responsibilities to U.S. consumers who are suffering from problems in their homes and to do what is fair and just in each case, if their products are involved and I want to underscore if their products are involved.

That’s right. Foreign manufacturers need to accept responsibility for their products.

News coverage…

• Wall Street Journal, “U.S. Stops Short of Faulting Drywall“
• McClatchy-Tribune News Services, “Feds: No link yet between drywall, health problems“
• Associated Press, “US safety chief says China helping on drywall“
• Wall Street Journal “China Real Time Report” blog, “Drywall Lesson: Caveat Emptor,” which offers the opinion that Tenenbaum “dodged” tougher questions on drywall in her Beijing press event.

Iain Murray of the Competitive Enterprise Institute testified Thursday at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s hearing on S. 1733, Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act, i.e., Kerry-Boxer. We commend his written statement about the proven failures of the European cap-and-trade regime, as well the issues involved with the developing world.

For an overview of his arguments and yesterday’s goings on at the Senate committee hearing, see Murray’s three posts at National Review Online’s The Corner blog:

• “Cap and Trade Update”

I had two main points. The first, one that was comprehensively ignored by the Democrats on the Committee and the other witnesses, is that the only big example we have for a cap and trade program for greenhouse gases, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), has been an expensive failure. Indeed, the vast cost — already far more than “a postage stamp a day” for European households — has been confirmed in a new report by my colleagues at the Taxpayers’ Alliance in London.

The ETS, the report finds, cost the EU economies as much as $171 billion in 2008. The cost to individual households in the U.K. was about $200. Moreover, climate change policies now account for 14 percent of the average household’s electricity bill and 21 percent of the average industrial electricity bill.

Murray also makes a few sharp observations about the protectionism stalking the committee debate.

• “Cap-and-Trade Update Part II,” commenting on Sen. Lamar Alexander’s contributions to the debate, especially in support of nuclear power.
• “Cap-and-Trade Update: Part III“:

The other main point in my testimony was that China, India, and the other developing nations will not accept any limitations on their emissions. The other panelists went to great lengths to pretend that this doesn’t really matter, but at the same time they all argued that all nations must accept binding emissions targets. For instance, they argued that Copenhagen must not be seen as Kyoto II. But China, India, and the G77 have stated firmly and without any room for argument that the Kyoto framework must continue: Developed nations must cut emissions while developing nations can take other actions, not requiring cuts in emissions. This is a circle that cannot be squared.

From a news release from the Handmade Toy Alliance, joining the many trade associations calling for a Senate Committee hearing on the jobs-killing Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act.

This is just another reminder to our members of Congress that the issues plaguing small businesses and the hand crafted community from the CPSIA have not gone away,” Jill Chuckas, Secretary of the HTA and owner of Crafty Baby (CT) stated. “A hearing that fully discusses these issues needs to be held very soon.”

Dan Marshall, HTA Vice-President and co-owner of Peapods Natural Toys (MN), went on to state “At this point, there is not enough time for the CPSC to issue enough rulings to help small batch manufacturers address their compliance issues prior to the lifting of the stay on February 10, 2010. Congress needs to begin an active hearing process that engages manufacturers large and small in a meaningful way and finally correct this law.”

Forty-one business groups sent a letter to Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) earlier this week calling for a Senate hearing on the CPSIA, a public discussion that includes representatives from people who have been harmed by the law’s excesses. Small businesses, including home-based operations and craftspeople, have been especially vocal about the CPSIA because it imposes compliance costs that many cannot meet.

A news release this week from the American Association of Justice, the trial lawyers’ lobby, cited this impressive list of fellow supporters for their cause:

Alliance for Justice, American Antitrust Institute, American Civil Liberties Union, The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, Center for Justice & Democracy, Christian Trial Lawyer’s Association, Committee to Support the Antitrust Laws, Community Catalyst, Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Earthjustice, Environment America, Essential Information, The Impact Fund, La Raza Centro Legal, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Association of Shareholder and Consumer Attorneys, National Consumer Law Center, National Consumers League, National Council of La Raza, National Crime Victims Bar Association, National Employment Lawyers Association, National Senior Citizens Law Center, National Whistleblowers Center, National Women’s Law Center, Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, Southern Poverty Law Center, Taxpayers Against Fraud, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group.

Yikes. That’s one litigous phalanx.

The cause they’re backing is Congressional legislation to ease pleadings standards in federal civil litigation, that is, to allow individuals and groups to file civil suits by just making a claim. A House Judiciary subcommittee held a hearing on the issue on Tuesday, “Access to Justice Denied – Ashcroft v. Iqbal.” Supporters of the legislation — including a bill sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) — want to reverse U.S. Supreme Court rulings in the Iqbal case as well as Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly. Lawyers USA has a good description: “In those cases, the Court rejected the ‘notice pleading’ standard in favor of a standard requiring plaintiffs to put enough facts in a complaint to establish a ‘plausible’ claim in order to withstand a challenge by the defense.”

We did a piece summarizing the hearing at Point of Law, “House bill will overturn Iqbal, restore previous pleading standards.” The Iqbal case concerned a Pakistani arrested after the murderous terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001; he wanted to sue for his treatment in a Brooklyn detention center. Thus, much of the debate dealt with national security, but the case has broader implications. Business associations are alarmed by the possibility of legislation will throw wide the courthouse doors to frivolous lawsuits. As former Assistant U.S. Attorney General Gregory Katsas testified, proposed legislation “is a recipe for a vast increase in litigation, which would impose huge costs on parties as well as on the already-overburdened federal courts.”

For more, see Walter Olson’s recommendations made at Overlawyered.com: “Overturning Supreme Court’s Iqbal/Twombly pleading jurisprudence emerging as key Congressional objective for trial lawyer lobby [Freddoso, Examiner; recent post of mine at Point of Law, and much other coverage there]“

The New York Times missed the mark last Sunday in its editorial criticizing proposed exemptions for business end-users of OTC derivatives from exchange trading requirements (“Too Little Regulation for Derivatives“). Many large and medium-size U.S. manufacturers use customized over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives to manage the cost of borrowing or other risks of operating their businesses, including fluctuating currency exchange and interest rates and commodity prices. For the record, transactions involving business end-users constitute about 10 percent of the overall OTC market, hardly “a big chunk,” of the industry.

A key benefit of OTC derivatives to manufacturers and other end-users is the ability to customize derivatives to specific risk management needs. In contrast, exchange trading requires the use of standardizing contracts, eliminating the ability of companies to tailor derivatives to specific risks, exposing businesses to increased costs, uncertainty and earnings volatility. Manufacturers agree that more transparency is needed in the derivatives market but mandatory exchange trading is not the way to go. Trade data repositories or other reporting requirements would achieve the same goal-without eliminating a risk management tool that allows manufacturers to focus on their core business.

In today’s challenging economy, OTC derivatives-by insulating companies from risk-help businesses keep operations going, invest in new technologies, build new plants and retain and create jobs.

From The Hill, “Business and drug groups blast bill; doctors are uneasy“:

Business groups blasted the House healthcare bill released Thursday, and a key trade association for doctors declined to endorse it.

Health insurance and pharmaceutical industries that take hard hits from the bill also took shots, saying it would drive up costs for seniors and companies alike.

Organizations representing employers remain deeply concerned about the bill’s mandate for employers to provide insurance, the public insurance option and the income surtax on people earning more than $500,000.

Forbes, “Health Reform by Bleeding the Rich“: “The House health care bill is a big milestone in the overall health care reform effort. But it’s also solidifying opposition among deep-pocketed insurers, manufacturers and millionaires.”

The article by Brian Wingfield focuses on the opposition to the House bill’s 5.4 percent income tax surcharge, which would hit many small businesses and manufacturers who file as individual taxpayers.

NAM President John Engler’s statement on the House bill is here.

UPDATE (11:30 a.m.): The Hill cites a letter written to House leaders by employer groups, including the National Association of Manufacturers. A copy is here.

What Halloween upon the land, we thought immediately of posting a Friday tune by The Cramps such as “I Was a Teenage Werewolf,” but the pants ride a bit too low for embedded video. Watch at your peril, and RIP Lux Interior.

So instead we return to those cynical post-punk leftists, the Mekons, because “Ghost of American Astronauts” has both the words “ghosts” and “factory” in it, which is as close as we’re going to get to a Halloween song about a haunted factory.

Sally Timms at her most fetching.

P.S. For a truly frightening, almost Lovecratian vision via rock ‘n roll, we’d say “The Impression of J. Temperance” by an early manifestation of The Fall does the trick. Or “Jawbone and the Air Rifle.” Murky videos you say? Well, that’s the point!

The National Association of Manufacturers released a statement from NAM President John Engler this afternoon on the House Democratic Leadership’s health care reform bill. It’s critical, especially of the 5.4 percent surtax on incomes over $500,000. That tax would hit many, many small manufacturers who files as S-corporations.

For NAM President Engler’s statement on H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, read on.
(continue reading…)

When Inez Tenenbaum went before the Senate Commerce Committee on June 16 for her confirmation hearing to chair the Consumer Product Safety Commission, she eschewed substantive commentary on the controversial Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA), saying she hoped to practice “common sense.” The disastrous CPSIA has provoked outrage among many business owners, but nominees often avoid hot-button topics and Tenenbaum’s reticence was accepted.

Still, Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR), chairing the session, did suggest she get up to speed and come back for a hearing he would call on the CPSIA, perhaps 60 days after her confirmation.

Well, the full Senate confirmed now-Chairman Tenenbaum on June 19, more than four months ago. She’s had time to travel to China, meet with many, many constituency groups and vote on CPSIA-related rules.

So it’s past time for the Senate and Tenenbaum to engage publicly on the business-destroying CPSIA. Today, 41 trade associations including the National Association of Manufacturers wrote Senator Pryor calling for a committee hearing on the new law. (Copy of the letter here.) The gist:

Consumer product safety is very important to the U.S. manufacturers and the retail community. To that end, the business community has made enormous and often costly efforts to comply with this important safety law. However, the CPSIA’s unintended consequences are causing confusion for consumers and economic damage to our members across the country, especially small businesses. Safe products are being pulled from store shelves because of fear, confusion, and a lack of guidance from the regulatory authorities.

As you know, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection held an oversight hearing on the CPSIA on September 10. Chairman Tenenbaum was the only witness at this hearing.

At the Senate hearing, we hope that Chairman Tenenbaum will further detail how the agency will approach the unresolved implementation issues, and we urge you to allow other witnesses to testify at the hearing from the business community so that the Committee obtains a full picture of the outstanding issues related to the law. The manufacturing community appreciated the opportunity to testify before your subcommittee during the development of the CPSIA. As frontline stakeholders in the legislation, we believe the committee would similarly benefit from our perspective on the implementation of the CPSIA.

The various stays of enforcement issued by CPSC to temporarily resolve CPSIA implementation problems will soon expire, and a permanent resolution is needed. We believe that the Senate’s oversight role is extremely important in helping the agency implement common sense solutions to resolve these issues, and we strongly urge you to set a date for a CPSIA oversight hearing.

The list of the groups that joined the letter is in the extended entry below.

(continue reading…)