Campaign for America's Future...Death

Eric Lotke is the research director at the "Campaign for America's Future"--"a reserach and policy organization" according to the LA Times. No mention of the very liberal politics of said organization. He was given space to write an extremely innacurate op-ed. The theme of his article is that smal government conservatives are responsible for the following events:

• E coli & Salmonella outbreaks
• Lead paint in toys from China
• Energy "deregulation" in California
• The movements (or "swooning")of commodities & stock markets
• The real estate bubble
• Credit rating agencies incorrect ratings

Regardless of whether such things can ever be prevented in a liberal fascist state as opposed to the nirvana of small government, Lotke assumes that preventing such things, however rare, has no cost. All we need to do is elect Obama and keep the current dysfunctional Congress and they will protect us.

But I would just like to point out ways that you can blame these things on liberal policies.

• E coli & Salmonella outbreaks

E coli & Salmonella outbreaks can be traced to the fact most of our farm, processing, & restaurant labor force cannot speak English and come from cultures where eating a salad is "a high risk activity". A communication and cultural gap encouraged by laws and policies that disincentive assimilation and allow mass illegal immigration.
And what about irradiation? A cheap way to increase food safety shot down by liberal busy bodies.

• Lead paint on toys from China

Why don't we make these toys in the US where lead paint is banned? You can thank the labor unions---a major part of the liberal establishment.

• Energy "deregulation" in California

Well, first off...IT WASN'T DEREGULATION!!!! How many times do I have to say this? It was the creation of a new and different regulatory framework. But about high prices of energy in general? Don't make me laugh. The liberals, with their lawsuits and eco-fascist lobbies do plenty to make energy expensive. Remember, new coal power is ILLEGAL to be used let alone generated in California.

• The movements (or "swooning")of commodities & stock markets

This is much like saying: "The moon is up, must be Bush's fault." Markets do all kinds of things in reaction to all kinds of policies, liberal, conservative, whatever. Liberal policies in general hamstring economic growth but democratic presidents sometimes preside over bull markets because investors are loath to sell when capital gains and dividend taxes are high.

• The real estate bubble

Are bubbles bad? For people who made bad decisions surely, but is that wrong? Some people became and remain very prosperous. Aside from low interest rates, which are set by the Fed (not Grover Norquist), what other cause of the bubble can be discerned. Prior to the bubble, many liberals and their congressional lapdogs moaned about "redlining"--the practice of excluding entire low income areas and persons from loan eligibility. Then, when interest rates became low enough and lenders convinced themselves they could price the risk into any loan--now anybody could buy a house. Countrywide, the bad boy of the mortgage lenders, received commendations from the FHA for its lending practices extending home loans to unqualified borrowers. But, hey, that's capitalism--no risk, no reward. I guess we could switch to socialism.

• Credit rating agencies incorrect ratings

It is conservative values that promote bond rating in the first place. Liberals would be happy to see bond holders go under for lack of guidance.This just goes to show that everyone makes mistakes. What would Mr. Lotke, have us do--have the government perform bond rating services? Or rate the raters? I fail to see how this would make things better. He implies the bond raters were paid off for good ratings but it hardly makes sense for these guys to take the risk that the whole basis of their business would be undermined. Most likely, they just made serious analytical mistakes.

My main point with this rebuttal is to show that bad things happen and always will happen. Preventing mistakes is laudable, but ALL mistakes? How much are you willing to pay for that? It is common among liberals to believe that regulatory action has little or no cost, only benefit. Or the cost is imposed on people who, in the liberal calculus, simply don't matter. They will fudge the numbers or categorize costs as benefits. Anything to show that more regulations equal more benefits. In the extreme, the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and many others have shown the dnagers of increasing regulation without considering the costs.

UPDATE: I forgot to mention this line from Mr. Lotke's op-ed that brought tears of joy:

"The agency's [Consumer Product Safety Comission] entire toy-testing department last year consisted of one man who dropped toys on his office floor to see if they broke."

Now that's my kind of government! Just give this guy a retirement package and delete the position.