Not satisfied with regulating all manufacturing, transportation, construction, energy and other economic activities, the head of the EPA is now weighing in on health care. The “Statement by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on Today’s Effort in Congress to Repeal the Affordable Care Act“:

This vote would take us back to the days when people could be denied coverage because of preexisting conditions or dropped from their insurance just because they get sick. With reports that asthma is on the rise – especially among children – and causing millions of emergency room and hospital visits each year, as well as tens of millions of missed school and work days, it is critical for our health and our economy that people have access to quality, affordable medical coverage. As the mother of a son with asthma and the head of an agency charged with protecting the health of the American people, it’s disheartening to see this support for a measure that would leave millions of adults and children without access to health coverage and force them to fend for themselves when they get sick.

We anxiously await Steven Chu’s input on HIPAA and Erik Shinseki’s guidance on medical liability reform.

Gov. Butch Otter of Idaho, a Republican, did not discuss the manufacturing sector generally but he cited the success of individual manufacturers and other companies in his State of the State address last week, a speech in which he called for major tax reform to support economic growth and fairness.

For businesses, economic and financial uncertainty caused in large part by misguided federal programs and policies are undermining confidence in the marketplace. Employers have no idea what it will cost them to comply with new health care mandates.

I understand their hesitation. But that’s stifling employment growth.

But there are plenty of examples out there of courageous and forward-looking business investments in Idaho’s future – examples that we should celebrate. For instance….

In Payette, Teton Manufacturing has more than enough work to hire at least four new machinists.
In Moscow, Biketronics is looking at sales increases that should enable it to expand and hire staff for a planned business incubator.
In Caldwell, Kit Manufacturing could be in a position to double its workforce in the coming year.
Fry Foods in Weiser is continuing to hire for its growing food processing business.

Otter criticized the federal health care laws in more detail than other governors whose state of the state addresses we’ve read.

Earlier posts on State of State addresses.

The National Association of Manufacturers is a member of the StartOver! Coalition, the members of which believe one can best achievable an affordable, flexible and sustainable health care system by repealing last year’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The supporting employer associations signed onto a full-page ad that ran in Capitol Hill publications.

To see the full ad and its list of supporting organizations, click here.

• MarketWatch, “Chicago manufacturing gauge leaps in December“: “WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — A barometer of manufacturing conditions in the Chicago region jumped in December to its best level in more than 22 years. The Chicago PMI rose to 68.6 in December from 62.5 in November, marking the 15th straight month that the gauge was over the 50 level indicating economic expansion and well above the 61 reading that economists polled by MarketWatch expected for December.”

• Manufacturers’ News, Inc., news release, “Manufacturers’ News Releases National Report on Manufacturing“: “EVANSTON, Ill., Dec. 29, 2010 /PRNewswire/ — Manufacturers’ News, Inc., publisher of industrial directories for all fifty states, has compiled a national analysis of U.S. manufacturing based on the company’s state-by-state reports released in calendar year 2010. According to Manufacturers’ News, industrial employment in the United States declined 3.3% and the number of U.S. manufacturers fell 4.1% when comparing the data collected by the most recent editions of MNI’s directories to each state’s previous edition. The full analysis can be seen here. ”

• See also Crain’s Detroit Business, “Michigan industrial employment numbers drop despite improved demand.” Also, Houston Business Journal, “Houston ranks as No. 1 manufacturing city in U.S.” and Puget Sound Business Journal, “Seattle moves up 12 spots on manufacturing list.”

• Phoenix Business Journal, “Small manufacturers have positive outlook“: “What do medical devices, clothing and high-tech netting that can stop grenades have in common? They all are manufactured in Arizona, and their makers are finding success through the creation and development of niche products.”

• Pittsburg Post-Gazette, “Things are looking up: Manufacturers remain optimistic as the economy begins to recover,” using as a news peg an interview with Frontier Steel president John Matig, whose company has withstood some tough times. “Half of the senior manufacturing executives surveyed by Grant Thornton said the U.S. economy would improve over the next six months, and 81 percent were very or somewhat optimistic about their prospects. ‘The manufacturing recovery is widespread and progressing at a moderate rate,’ said Daniel J. Meckstroth, chief economist for the Manufacturers Alliance/MAPI.”

•New Brunswick Business Journal (Canada), “Recovery depends on manufacturing, exports“: “A sustained economic recovery for Canada depends largely on a strong, continued rebound of the country’s manufacturing production and strong international export markets, according to the latest outlook from the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters. ‘We’ve had a pretty strong economic rebound over the last year, but that was pretty much on borrowed money,’ said Jayson Myers, the CEO of the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, in reference to high consumer and government debt loads.”

• The Daily Caller, “Business Roundtable to scrutinize Obamacare for problems, new president says“: “The incoming president of The Business Roundtable, which was once President Obama’s strongest ally in the private sector, said Monday that much of the group’s work on health care over the next two years will be looking for how Obama’s health care overhaul might ‘threaten’ the ability of employers to continue providing insurance. ‘The health care reform bill that passed, there’s mounting evidence that it doesn’t deal with the cost of health care,’ said John Engler, who will take the reins of the 170-member BRT in mid-January…”

Writing at National Review’s The Corner blog, Yuval Levin dissects the op-ed response from Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius to the federal judge striking down the individual mandate in the federal health care law. Like us, Levin can find no legal or constitutional argument in their Washington Post column, “Health reform will survive its legal fight,” just a weak case made on policy grounds.

Levin writes:

Their argument, in essence, is that the government has the right to do anything it wants to in the health-care arena because all human beings get sick, and their getting sick can have economic consequences. The choice of some not to purchase insurance means that when they get sick they might incur some costs that would have to be shouldered by others. “For decades,” Holder and Sebelius write, “Supreme Court decisions have made clear that the Constitution allows Congress to adopt rules to deal with such harmful economic effects.” And the way the new health-care law would “deal with” such harmful effects is to make it illegal to make the choice not to purchase insurance. Simple.

  (continue reading…)

U.S. District Court Judge Henry Hudson of the Eastern District of Virginia ruled against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act on Monday, rejecting the attempt by Congress to force people to buy a product, in this case, health insurance. The core paragraph in his ruling:

The unchecked expansion of congressional power to the limits suggested by the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers. At its core, this dispute is not simply about regulating the business of insurance – or crafting a scheme of universal health insurance coverage – it’s about an individual’s right to choose to participate.

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who brought the suit, emphasized constitutional principles in his comments on the court’s ruling: “This is only round one. This lawsuit is not about health-care, it’s about liberty.”

In an interview on WMAL this morning and other comments, the Republican Attorney General responded to questions about expedited review by the Supreme Court by noting the economic consequences of continued undertainty: “With this ongoing court battle, there is a great deal of uncertainty for states, individuals, and businesses as to whether this law will be around two years from now or not. We need this resolved as quickly as possible – for the good of our people and our economy.”

In a Washington Post op-ed — they must have anticipated a defeat — Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius argued that the health care law brings many goods thing to people and would not be possible without the individual mandate. After leading with an anecdote about the benefits of the law, they argue:

As these lawsuits continue, Americans should be clear about what the opponents of reform are asking the courts to do. Striking down the individual responsibility provision means slamming the door on millions of Americans like Gail O’Brien, who’ve been locked out of our health insurance markets, and shifting more costs onto families who’ve acted responsibly.

It’s not surprising that opponents, having lost in Congress, have taken to the courts. We saw similar challenges to laws that created Social Security and established new civil rights protections. Those challenges ultimately failed, and so will this one.

Thus, the Administration’s argument is a political, not a constitutional one, foreshadowing the 112th Congress and 2012 elections. There appear to be no limits on the federal government’s mandates in this view. And if you oppose their view on health care, you oppose Social Security and civil rights. Clear?

Washington Post, “Cantor, McDonnell call for expedited Supreme Court review of health-care law”
Cuccinelli news release, “Virginia wins federal court challenge over constitutionality of federal health care act: Health insurance mandate is unconstitutional”

Two brief profiles of Cuccinelli:

• Washington Examiner, “Obamacare victory launches Cuccinelli to national stage“
• New York Times, the Caucus blog, “The Man Who Took On Obama Health Care — and Won Round One“

The NAM is not a party to any of the litigation against the federal health care law.

Thursday’s Halloween-themed comic strip.

It’s hard to imagine the discussions that went into the writing of the legislation to expand the federal government’s role in health care, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act:

But how do we pay for all this?

Well, our medical device industry is the global leader, innovating and really stimulating economic growth.

Good, let’s tax it!

Which leads us to this entry in the new report from Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and John Barrasso (R-WY), both doctors, “Grim Diagnosis – A check-up on the federal health law.”

Companies that innovate, create, and develop life-saving, life-improving devices will likely lose jobs too. Manufacturers of medical devices are reeling from a provision of the law that will levy a $20 billion excise tax on their industry. The Boston Globe reported that the 2.3 percent excise tax on companies that supply medical devices like heart defibrillators and surgical tools to hospitals, health centers and ambulance services, will force industry leaders to lay off workers and curb the research and development of new medical tools. One CEO said the new tax threatens his business‘ sustainability because it has relegated his company‘s profitability to merely a break-even position.

The basic problem with the tax is one of math. Many small to midsize medical device companies will owe more to the federal government in taxes than they make in profits, according to Mark Leahy, head of the Medical Device Manufacturers Association. “We’re talking about a 2.3 percent tax on total sales, irrespective of whether a company is making a profit.” The device tax will hamper innovation, since the amount of money available for a company to reinvest in its business development will be reduced. Some companies are already contemplating moving jobs overseas to avoid losing their competitive edge. Outsourcing is just one of many adverse unintended consequences of the new law.

The news release is, “Drs. Coburn and Barrasso Release New Health Care Report.” Jobs will be lost.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), a medical doctor, spoke via telephone to the weekly bloggers’ briefing hosted by the Heritage Foundation today, discussing the new report from Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), also an M.D., “GRIM DIAGNOSIS — A check-up on the federal health law.”

An attendee alluded to McDonalds winning a waiver from the Department of Health and Human Services so it wouldn’t have to raise the minimum annual benefit in its low-cost health care plan offered to some employees. He asked if this kind of waiver invited partisan favoritism. Sen. Coburn responded:

I wouldn’t see it so much in partisan light. If in fact we’re going to have a different set of standards for McDonalds than we have for everybody else, and for Arby’s and everybody else, and then the next company that comes up and says, “We can’t do this, we need a waiver.: Then pretty soon you don’t have a program, what you have a mish mash, and nobody knows what it is. So it’s very dangerous.

What they’re trying to do is keep the first big company from saying, “We give up. We’re not offering health care anymore.” Because the first time, the first large company that does that, then the floodgates are going to open. And tons of companies are just going to say, “We’re paying the fine. We’re not offering health care any more. We’re going to pay our employees more money, plus the fine, and let them find out what they want to get in health care themselves.”… (continue reading…)

The Senate on Wednesday voted 40-59 against S.J.Res. 39, a “resolution of disapproval” under the Congressional Review Act that would have blocked the Department of Health and Human Services from implementing its proposed Grandfather Rule.

The National Association of Manufacturers sent the Senate a “Key Vote” letter in support of the resolution introduced by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY), the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Excerpt:

Unfortunately, the Grandfather Rule proposed by HHS limits the ability of manufacturers to tailor their health plans to meet the needs of their workforce. This will lead to higher health care costs due to restrictions on changes made to cost-sharing, employer contributions and other routine tools businesses use to lower costs.

For example, losing grandfather status will impose additional mandates on manufacturers, such as a burdensome claims appeals process, additional transparency requirements and additional reporting requirements.

Sen. Enzi’s office issued a news release when the Senator introduced the resolution, “Enzi proposes to overturn job killing provision in new health care law.”