ObamaCare Employer Mandate: A List Of Cuts To Work Hours, Jobs

ObamaCare's impact on jobs is hotly debated by politicians and economists. Critics say the Affordable Care Act, with its employer mandate to provide health insurance, gives businesses an incentive to cut workers' hours. This year, report after report has rolled in about employers restricting work hours to fewer than 30 per week — the point where the mandate kicks in. Data also point to a shrinking workweek in low-wage industries.

In the interest of an informed debate, we've compiled a list of job actions with strong proof that ObamaCare's employer mandate is behind cuts to work hours or staffing levels. As of Sept. 3, our ObamaCare scorecard included 258 employers. The ObamaCare list methodology is explained further in our initial coverage; click on the employer names in the list below for links to supporting records, mostly news accounts or official documents.

We'll continue to update the list, which we encourage you to share and download into a spreadsheet to sort and analyze. If you know of an employer that should be on the list and can provide supporting evidence, please contact IBD at jed.graham@investors.com.

Click on Hear for List of Employers who cut hours.

Via: IBD:

Continue Reading....

The Typical American Family Makes Less Than It Did in 1989

The Census Bureau is out with the annual report on incomes and poverty. And while you might think that after years of stagnant incomes and elevated poverty rates, we would be inured to the depressing facts contained therein, it still somehow has the power to shock.

For my money, the most depressing fact about the economy is not the fact that household incomes were basically flat in 2012 (the real median household income was down to $51,017 from $51,100 in 2011, a statistically insignificant change). It wasn't even the fact that 15 percent of the U.S. population was living in poverty, according to the official, flawed definition of the term.

Nah, the most depressing result comes when you look at the longer view of household incomes in the United States. This chart shows real median household income over the past 25 years; that is, the money earned, in inflation-adjusted dollars, by the family at the exact middle of the income distribution.

Via Fox News

Continue Reading.....

California: No Comments from the Peanut Gallery

Some years ago, at a meeting of the California State Council on Developmental Disabilities, a controversial suggestion by one of the council members resulted in startled murmurs from the audience. Annoyed by this unsolicited feedback, the council member blurted out, “No comments from the Peanut Gallery.”

For those younger than the baby boom generation, it should probably be mentioned that the “Peanut Gallery” was what the audience of preschoolers was called on the 1950s Howdy Doody TV show. This was a disrespectful and demeaning comment by a public official, and no doubt the perpetrator quickly regretted his honesty because it confirmed what anyone who has spent time around government insiders know: This is precisely how most bureaucrats and elected officials regard the public. Citizens are like children and thus “should be seen and not heard.”

This attitude of superiority and disdain for the public helps explain politicians’ extreme hostility to the initiative process. As I have written before, government insiders find it annoying that average citizens have the option to place measures on the ballot which can run counter to their plans.

It also explains why the Legislature just passed Assembly Bill 857, currently sitting on the Governor’s desk, that is the most direct assault on direct democracy in California in the last 100 years. This attack makes it more difficult for most citizen groups to qualify measures for the ballot. The bill is sponsored by two of the biggest labor organizations in Sacramento, the Labor Federation and the California Professional Firefighters, entities that have long viewed the ballot box as a threat to their interests, especially as it relates to pension reform. One of its key provisions is to impose a requirement that ten percent of the signatures for a statewide measure be collected by non-paid signature gatherers. However, the measure would exempt non-profits including public employee unions.

In any event, this requirement is facially arbitrary. The bill does not articulate the policy justification for the restriction let alone the cutoff of ten percent. The requirement is also very likely to be stricken as unconstitutional.

Via; California Political Review

Continue Reading....

STARBUCKS CEO: OBAMACARE 'GOOD THING FOR THE COUNTRY'

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz says Obamacare is "a good thing for the country." 

The coffee giant chief's comments came during a CNBC interview with anchor Maria Bartiromo. 

"On balance, I would say the health care law, to provide health insurance for those people who did not have it, was a good thing for the country and a good thing for those people, and I would encourage them to find ways to provide the insurance and not figure out a way to either lower the hours or get around the system," said Schultz.

Schultz blasted businesses that are reducing worker hours to avoid Obamacare fines.

"Many companies today are reducing hours of full-time people to get under the minimum so they don't have to pay health care costs," said Schultz. "I just shake my head because that's not going to build long-term value and trust with your people. That is a short-term solution and ultimately is not going to add value to the enterprise, the company and your customers."

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that employers will be forced to pay $130 billion in Obamacare penalties. 

Investor's Business Daily has compiled a growing list of 258 employers who have slashed worker hours or laid off workers in reaction to the law's regulations.

Via: Breitbart

Continue Reading...

No Excuse for Amnesty First

One of the reasons the amnesty-first crowd has opposed making legalization contingent on the complete implementation of enforcement measures is that they think it would take too long.

Whatever you think of that argument, its factual basis has been eliminated by a new report from my colleague Janice Kephart. She took a close look at the options for biometric recording of the departures of legal foreign visitors at airports and seaports and found that, contrary to administration claims, it’s both technically feasible and cost-effective.

The Gang of Eight bill requires such a system to be in place a decade in the future, maybe, as a condition for the amnesty recipients to upgrade their legal status from green-card-lite to green-card-premium. Among the concerns of critics is that once all the illegals have been legalized (which happens shortly after Obama has his bill-signing ceremony) the various enforcement promises, including the one for exit-tracking, will fade away and be ignored. This is not an idle concern; the development of an electronic exit-tracking system has already been mandated by Congress eight times (I’d thought it was just six) and we still don’t have one. If you don’t have a reliable record of which foreign visa-holders have left the country, you can’t know which ones overstayed and became illegal aliens (overstays are believed to account for some 40 percent of the total illegal-alien population).

Via: National Review Online

Continue Reading....