Recent Republican jobs proposals

The Republican Party opposes President Barack Obama’s jobs bill, which Macroeconomic Advisers says will boost America’s GDP and add more than 2 million jobs in the next two years. (See also former McCain campaign economist Mark Zandi — who says the bill would create 1.9 million jobs next year.)

But it’s not as though Republicans don’t have any ideas of their own about how to create jobs. Here are three recent Republican jobs proposals, all of which were really offered in earnest by Republican lawmakers.

1. Importing invasive snakes

A ban on exotic invasive species of snakes, such as the Burmese python, is Exhibit A for the Republican argument that over-regulation is strangling job creation:

In the on-going battle over the dismal state of the jobs market, Republicans argue that a “regulatory tsunami” from the Obama administration is choking off jobs growth. Committee members say the free market should handle the giant pythons and that government tampering would “devastate a small but thriving sector of the economy.”

2. De-fund Injury and Illness Prevention

It’s not just the dynamic Burmese python importation business being hobbled by government red tape, it’s also all those workers not being hobbled by injuries. A recent Republican budget proposal in Congress proposed economic stimulus through the elimination of the Labor Department’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program, ending research into repetitive-motion injuries, and getting rid of that rule about workers on rooftops needing safety harnesses.

The short-term harm to safety-harness manufacturers will, I suppose, be overcome by increased spending at emergency rooms.

3. Dwarf-tossing.

No, really. See, those Big Brother socialists in Tallahassee banned the demeaning spectacle in 1999, but a Republican Florida lawmaker says repealing that ban — like all deregulation — will create jobs:

“I’m on a quest to seek and destroy unnecessary burdens on the freedom and liberties of people,” [Fla. Rep. Ritch] Workman said. “This is an example of Big Brother government.”

So don’t let anyone tell you that Republicans don’t have any ideas for creating jobs.

Stay in touch with the Slacktivist on Facebook:

Guys like us, we had it made ...
A red traffic light: This election is about one idea
Donald Trump's one idea: The only thing that matters in this election
Oh yeah? Well what about Robert Byrd?
  • Anonymous

    *throws up hands*

    I give up. We’re clearly living in the Onion.

  • Matri

    *throws up hands*

    I give up. We’re clearly living in the Onion.
    Not true. The Onion would have articulated more sense.

  • No-one

    Bah. HTML fail. :(

  • Anonymous

    I give up. We’re clearly living in the Onion.

    Well, that explains why I’ve been crying all the time.

  • Lonespark

    I would like to award you two this joint Internet.

  • Anonymous

    *throws up hands*

    I give up. We’re clearly living in the Onion.

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Is there a non-horrible term for the thing that used to be called a Chinese Fire Drill?

    “Charlie Foxtrot”, although not quite the same thing, probably captures the Republican Party’s collective antics.

    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Charlie_Foxtrot

    For something akin to “Chinese Fire Drill”, try “of much sound and fury, signifiying nothing.”

  • http://apocalypsereview.wordpress.com/ Invisible Neutrino

    Is there a non-horrible term for the thing that used to be called a Chinese Fire Drill?

    “Charlie Foxtrot”, although not quite the same thing, probably captures the Republican Party’s collective antics.

    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Charlie_Foxtrot

    For something akin to “Chinese Fire Drill”, try “of much sound and fury, signifiying nothing.”

  • Emcee, cubed

    WARNING: I am not completely familiar with acceptable language and terms associated with this issue. Please excuse me if I say something that might be construed as offensive. None is intended.

    My admittedly limited understanding of some of the issues behind the ban:

    1.) There are physiological issues inherent in dwarfism that make this type of thing particularly dangerous. Dwarfs are more likely to sustain damage than a regular-sized person would be from similar circumstances.

    2.) There were no standards or regulations about protective padding or any kind of safety attire. Dwarfs were usually wrapped in velcro or foam rubber padding or whatever the bar owner/employer felt like using. This more often gave the illusion of safety (staving off possible complaints of abuse) without any actual safety. And because of the above-mentioned physiological differences between dwarfs and regular-sized people, vulnerable areas could be un – or under-protected.

    3.) There is a strong history of exploitation in the “sport”. It was not uncommon for bar owners to let dwarfs with an obvious drinking problem (I have heard that there is a high rate of alcoholism among dwarfs, but have no data to back this up, so I don’t want to portray it as fact) run up a tab so large they would have trouble paying it off, and then offer to let them work it down by becoming a tossee. Or just letting them get drunk and then saying, “Hey, do you want to do this?” Either way, there was a lot of taking advantage. There were likely some places that didn’t do this, possibly even many or a majority, but it was a major issue.

    4.) Regulating dwarf-tossing like you would any other sport or hazardous occupation, would have amounted to a ban anyway. Dwarf-tossing is essentially a bar game more than a sport, like beer pong. If they had to actually buy equipment, bars wouldn’t actually do it. The whole point is that it was cheap to do.

    There may be other things, but these are points I’ve heard made in some of the articles I read on it.

  • Emcee, cubed

    WARNING: I am not completely familiar with acceptable language and terms associated with this issue. Please excuse me if I say something that might be construed as offensive. None is intended.

    My admittedly limited understanding of some of the issues behind the ban:

    1.) There are physiological issues inherent in dwarfism that make this type of thing particularly dangerous. Dwarfs are more likely to sustain damage than a regular-sized person would be from similar circumstances.

    2.) There were no standards or regulations about protective padding or any kind of safety attire. Dwarfs were usually wrapped in velcro or foam rubber padding or whatever the bar owner/employer felt like using. This more often gave the illusion of safety (staving off possible complaints of abuse) without any actual safety. And because of the above-mentioned physiological differences between dwarfs and regular-sized people, vulnerable areas could be un – or under-protected.

    3.) There is a strong history of exploitation in the “sport”. It was not uncommon for bar owners to let dwarfs with an obvious drinking problem (I have heard that there is a high rate of alcoholism among dwarfs, but have no data to back this up, so I don’t want to portray it as fact) run up a tab so large they would have trouble paying it off, and then offer to let them work it down by becoming a tossee. Or just letting them get drunk and then saying, “Hey, do you want to do this?” Either way, there was a lot of taking advantage. There were likely some places that didn’t do this, possibly even many or a majority, but it was a major issue.

    4.) Regulating dwarf-tossing like you would any other sport or hazardous occupation, would have amounted to a ban anyway. Dwarf-tossing is essentially a bar game more than a sport, like beer pong. If they had to actually buy equipment, bars wouldn’t actually do it. The whole point is that it was cheap to do.

    There may be other things, but these are points I’ve heard made in some of the articles I read on it.

  • http://www.ghiapet.net/ Randy Owens

    And besides, we have the (in)famous words of Gimli son of Gloin, himself: “Nobody tosses a dwarf!”

  • http://www.ghiapet.net/ Randy Owens

    And besides, we have the (in)famous words of Gimli son of Gloin, himself: “Nobody tosses a dwarf!”

  • Matri

    It is at this point in time that I find myself asking, surprisingly un-sarcastically:

    What the fuck are they smoking, and did they at least wait for the high to wear off before making those suggestions?

    Non-white man comes up with a plan to fix the economy that these idiots wrecked, and even his opponents say it will work. But no, the republicans insist on sticking to their to oppose everything he does.

    Then, realizing too late what they just did, decided to toss out a few ideas of their own, in an attempt to not look like idiots.

    You’re hogging the idiot ball, republicans. Good job at that.

  • Matri

    It is at this point in time that I find myself asking, surprisingly un-sarcastically:

    What the fuck are they smoking, and did they at least wait for the high to wear off before making those suggestions?

    Non-white man comes up with a plan to fix the economy that these idiots wrecked, and even his opponents say it will work. But no, the republicans insist on sticking to their to oppose everything he does.

    Then, realizing too late what they just did, decided to toss out a few ideas of their own, in an attempt to not look like idiots.

    You’re hogging the idiot ball, republicans. Good job at that.

  • Lori

    A nice bit of proof that not all the anti-marriage equality bigots have completely lost touch with reality—NC Governor Bev Perdue doesn’t want the gays getting married, but she thinks jobs are more important than making extra certain that they can’t. 

     “My top priority
    is creating jobs. Too many people are out of work and I’ve heard from
    several business leaders who’ve told me that the proposed constitutional
    amendment will harm our state’s business climate and make it harder to
    grow jobs here. I believe that marriage is between one man and one
    woman: That’s why I voted for the law in 1996 that defines marriage as
    between one man and one woman, and that’s why I continue to support that
    law today. But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot
    in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell
    them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job. In
    addition, a number of legal experts have argued that this amendment, if
    passed, could eliminate legal protections for all unmarried couples in
    our state, regardless of sexual orientation. Right now, my focus, the
    General Assembly’s focus, and North Carolina’s focus needs to be on
    creating jobs.”  

    http://www.governor.nc.gov/NewsItems/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?newsItemID=2078

    Baby steps. Baby steps. 

  • Lori

    A nice bit of proof that not all the anti-marriage equality bigots have completely lost touch with reality—NC Governor Bev Perdue doesn’t want the gays getting married, but she thinks jobs are more important than making extra certain that they can’t. 

     “My top priority
    is creating jobs. Too many people are out of work and I’ve heard from
    several business leaders who’ve told me that the proposed constitutional
    amendment will harm our state’s business climate and make it harder to
    grow jobs here. I believe that marriage is between one man and one
    woman: That’s why I voted for the law in 1996 that defines marriage as
    between one man and one woman, and that’s why I continue to support that
    law today. But I’m going to vote against the amendment because I cannot
    in good conscience look an unemployed man or woman in the eye and tell
    them that this amendment is more important than finding them a job. In
    addition, a number of legal experts have argued that this amendment, if
    passed, could eliminate legal protections for all unmarried couples in
    our state, regardless of sexual orientation. Right now, my focus, the
    General Assembly’s focus, and North Carolina’s focus needs to be on
    creating jobs.”  

    http://www.governor.nc.gov/NewsItems/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?newsItemID=2078

    Baby steps. Baby steps. 

  • http://timothy.green.name/ Timothy (TRiG)

    Hang on. Is this a political party or a surrealist art project?

    TRiG.

  • http://timothy.green.name/ Timothy (TRiG)

    Hang on. Is this a political party or a surrealist art project?

    TRiG.

  • Ima Pseudonym

    WAT.

  • Ima Pseudonym

    WAT.

  • Anonymous

    I’m a herpetology hobbyist (herper), so I’d like to make point about the economics of snakes that I’ve observed over many years fo watching the industry.

    1)  Stopping the importation of Burmese Pythons, Reticulated Pythons, and African Rock Pythons will have a mild deleterious effect on the trade of said pythons, probably in the small increase of wholesale prices.  But that will be about it.  Fun fact: Burm’s and Retic’s have large established snake breeders that make as many as the breeders think they can sell.  They also come in a variety of fetching phases (like a “breed” of dog.)  Bob Clark is a huge name in Retic breeding and you can check out his site at bobclark.com if you don’t believe me.

    2)  Stopping importation of these pythons won’t put anyone out of business.  Jobbers and importers will import or wholesale just about anything.  No one specializes in the importation of Burmese pythons.  They’ll just move on to different species of livestock.  It may make a temporary dent in their income, but it will probably be no big deal.

    3)  Stopping importation will raise the price of adult, breeding pairs/individuals of those species.  Again, since there are already large, established breeding programs, this isn’t a big deal.  I would expect a temporary rise in adult prices, followed by a short price crash that will drive out the breeder hobbyists.  The market will probably then stabilize at about the same current wholesale price (maybe $30-50 dollars higher for normal phase.)

    If the goal were to increase employment in the U.S., then they would discourage the importation of snakes and encourage captive breeding facilities in the U.S. If the goal were to decrease the amount of invasives, then they would have to make ownership of the invasive illegal where it would have a chance of reproducing, like they did for the Hawaiian Islands.

    I have no idea why they would relax snake importation regs.  Unless they were trying to help drug mules.  I’ve heard of pythons being a place where people have stored drugs.  After all, they are a big tube with seals at both ends that generally aren’t checked that closely when being imported.  This is evil.

    Anyways, I’m not sure I’m making much sense, so goodnight.

  • Anonymous

    I’m a herpetology hobbyist (herper), so I’d like to make point about the economics of snakes that I’ve observed over many years fo watching the industry.

    1)  Stopping the importation of Burmese Pythons, Reticulated Pythons, and African Rock Pythons will have a mild deleterious effect on the trade of said pythons, probably in the small increase of wholesale prices.  But that will be about it.  Fun fact: Burm’s and Retic’s have large established snake breeders that make as many as the breeders think they can sell.  They also come in a variety of fetching phases (like a “breed” of dog.)  Bob Clark is a huge name in Retic breeding and you can check out his site at bobclark.com if you don’t believe me.

    2)  Stopping importation of these pythons won’t put anyone out of business.  Jobbers and importers will import or wholesale just about anything.  No one specializes in the importation of Burmese pythons.  They’ll just move on to different species of livestock.  It may make a temporary dent in their income, but it will probably be no big deal.

    3)  Stopping importation will raise the price of adult, breeding pairs/individuals of those species.  Again, since there are already large, established breeding programs, this isn’t a big deal.  I would expect a temporary rise in adult prices, followed by a short price crash that will drive out the breeder hobbyists.  The market will probably then stabilize at about the same current wholesale price (maybe $30-50 dollars higher for normal phase.)

    If the goal were to increase employment in the U.S., then they would discourage the importation of snakes and encourage captive breeding facilities in the U.S. If the goal were to decrease the amount of invasives, then they would have to make ownership of the invasive illegal where it would have a chance of reproducing, like they did for the Hawaiian Islands.

    I have no idea why they would relax snake importation regs.  Unless they were trying to help drug mules.  I’ve heard of pythons being a place where people have stored drugs.  After all, they are a big tube with seals at both ends that generally aren’t checked that closely when being imported.  This is evil.

    Anyways, I’m not sure I’m making much sense, so goodnight.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X