The Press-Dispatch
Issue link: https://www.ifoldsflip.com/i/1400710
The Press-Dispatch Wednesday, August 11, 2021 B-5 nomic lunacy of increasing taxes on capital gains and dividends, wealth taxes, and, worst of all, death taxes that threaten the future survival of family-owned businesses. Cutting, not raising, the U.S. capital gains tax would be far wiser if we want America to maintain and widen our com- petitive lead and keep win- ning globally. Over a few de- cades, the returns to the gov- ernment from more invest- ment will pay a rich bounty to the coffers of the feds and states and cities. The arrogant fools in the Biden administration believe that to keep America No. 1 technologically, we need to have a multibillion-dollar gov- ernment-run slush fund with the politicians picking win- ners and losers with other people's money. China does this, and so does Japan, and it has never worked. One of the most famous stories of gov- ernment-as-investment bank- er was when the Tokyo gov- ernment's brain trust recom- mended that Honda not get in the business of making cars. Here in the U.S., the political class has made a $150 billion bet on wind and solar power since the late 1970s, and in return, that has produced on- ly a small sliver of our ener- gy needs. Even more inexplicable is the movement in America coming from senators such as Democrat Elizabeth War- ren of Massachusetts on the left and Josh Hawley of Mis- souri on the right to break up our tech companies. Why? Because, evidently, they are TOO good at what they do. They make too much money. They have too many custom- ers and too many advertisers. Put aside for a moment the rancid political persuasions of some of these leftist Sili- con Valley CEOs. Somehow, the left and right agree that building a superior product and even crafting entire new industries is a punishable of- fense. God forbid. The rest of the world — the Chinese, Indians, Japanese and especially the technolog- ically inferior Europeans — would love to hobble Ameri- can titans and tax away their profits. The role of the U.S. government should be to re- pel the foreign attacks. Cra- zily, the Biden administration has given the green light to foreigners pillaging Ameri- can companies. This doesn't put America first. So, can America's tech dominance continue to blow away the foreign competi- tion for decades to come? Bet on it. Unless we are fool- ish enough to decapitate our own industries through reg- ulation, antitrust policies and raising tax rates on suc- cess. The challenge for U.S. supremacy is coming from Washington, D.C. Not China. Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Founda- tion and an economic consul- tant with FreedomWorks. He is the co-author of "Trumpo- nomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive the Amer- ican Economy." US TECH Continued from page 4 of billions worth of funds that were origi- nally passed in COVID-19 relief bills. The vast majority of this amount (such as states turning down harmful unemployment ben- efit expansions) would not have been spent, meaning this represents fake savings. 3. Sets Up a $3.5 Trillion Left-Wing Bonanza. Congressional Democrats have repeat- edly stated that they will not allow any in- frastructure bill to reach President Joe Biden's desk for signature unless it is ac- companied by a $ 3.5 trillion package passed along party lines through the bud- get procedure known as reconciliation. This package would be the largest tax- and-spend bill in the history of the world. It would hike taxes on investment just when the economic recovery needs it most, seek to give amnesty to illegal immigrants, ex- pand welfare benefits on a scale not seen in generations, and deliver the radical Green New Deal agenda. 4. Massive Amounts of Wasted Transportation Spending. While the bill's spending is focused on transportation, that doesn't mean Congress is making a smart investment. On the contrary: it adds as much new spending to modes like mass transit and Amtrak as it does for highways, even though buses and rail account for only a ti- ny fraction of travel. Even the value of highway funding is hampered by wasteful set-asides: $2 mil- lion per year for bee-friendly landscaping, $50 million per year to combat weeds, and expensive mandates that give unionized contractors a leg up on taxpayer-friendly, non-union shops. 5. Embeds Climate Activism in the Department of Transportation. The climate section of the bill expands the size and scope of the federal govern- ment with alternate fuel corridors, grants for electric and alternative vehicle refuel- ing stations, cost-sharing for weather resis- tant infrastructure, workforce training pro- grams, and even grants for reflective side- walks and tree planting. By and large, these are highly local proj- ects that should be paid for by residents and users, and in some cases (such as electric vehicle charging stations) duplicate what states and the private sector are already doing. Perhaps most significantly, Section 11403 requires states to reduce carbon di- oxide emissions from highway transporta- tion by developing state "carbon reduction strategy" plans that must be approved by the federal government and updated at least every four years. The bill does not indicate what environmental benefits these strate- gies are to achieve or what level of reduc- tions will be required. This gives a lot of leeway to the federal bureaucracy to define the goal, and mini- mal accountability to Americans as to costs and benefits of the program. That's a poor way to conduct environmental policy, will likely increase costs for Americans, and will have no meaningful impact on global temperatures. Congress needs to remember whose job it is to do the legislating, and that it is its constituents who will bear the costs of ill-conceived policies. 6. Corporate Welfare for the Ener- gy Sector. The energy section incorporates the En- ergy Infrastructure Act of Sen. Joe Man- chin, D-W.Va., which spends exorbitant- ly on virtually every energy technology, fuel, and supply chain. Handouts include grants, loan guarantees, cost-sharing pro- grams, and federally funded research, de- velopment, demonstration, and commer- cialization. The bill spends on major new programs at the Department of Energy, riddling the energy sector with cronyism and barriers to entry for companies and technologies that don't fit the federal government's defi- nition and mold of "innovative." This takes the U.S. further away from an energy sector where businesses must compete to understand and meet the needs, preferences, and choices of customers (as opposed to what is politically preferred). It also protects certain electricity com- panies over customers. In particular, it repackages the nuclear power bailout at- tempted in previous years. Competition gives customers more choices, who are increasingly interested in "green" energy options and are always in- terested in reducing their expenses if given the freedom to make informed decisions. At the same time, competition forces com- panies to be efficient and innovative—in- herently pro-environment features. Bail- outs do the opposite. Meanwhile, the bill fails to address root regulatory issues that tie up energy infra- structure of all types from being deployed in a timely, efficient manner. For example, it creates research and development pro- grams on critical minerals used in cell- phones, batteries, solar panels, and many other products. Yet the overwhelming problem the indus- try faces is federal permitting, which can take a decade to complete, and a litigation culture reinforced by vague laws, which wastes significant time and resources on technicalities rather than material issues. A fter all, what's the point of increasing tax- payer spending on innovative technologies if they just get strangled by red tape? On a positive note, the bill requests re- ports on jobs lost and consumer costs in- curred by the Biden administration's coun- terproductive decision to halt the Keystone XL pipeline, the environmental impacts of electric vehicles, and the role of forced la- bor in China's electric vehicle supply chain. 7. Applies Social Justice Approach to Broadband Internet. The package provides nearly $ 65 bil- lion for expanding broadband internet ser- vice. Of that, the bill allocates $42 billion for the Broadband Equity, Access, and De- ployment program, which funds grants for broadband infrastructure and related proj- ects. The program also places an emphasis on favoring municipal broadband networks, which are government- and nonprofit-run broadband networks. When local governments overbuild exist- ing networks, it limits the ability of private internet service providers that are already serving the area to recoup costs of deploy- ing and operating their own networks, as the new government networks take custom- er share. As a result of the reduced market share, the ability of private providers to ef- fectively deliver service, along with upgrad- ing their networks, is severely degraded. The bill also makes changes to the Emergency Broadband Benefit program. Besides renaming the Emergency Broad- band Benefit to the A ffordable Connectivi- ty Benefit program, the bill cuts the cost of low-income internet access plans from $50 per month to just $ 30 per month. This provision goes hand in hand with another requirement of the bill: that any in- ternet providers who receive a grant from the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deploy- ment program must offer a plan for low-in- come consumers at rates set by the state. While the infrastructure bill emphasiz- es that it does not allow rate regulation of broadband, that is exactly what these pro- visions do. The bill also includes the radical Digi- tal Equity Act of 2021. It directs $2.75 bil- lion toward the stated goal of "achieving digital equity is a matter of social and eco- nomic justice." This includes a definition for "gender identity" and ensuring that "incarcerat- ed individuals" (aka prisoners) are able to have high-speed internet access. The Digital Equity Act also specifies en- tities to oversee the distribution of funds, including the Appalachian Regional Com- mission, which is co-chaired by Manchin's wife, Gayle Manchin. While improving the deployment of broadband is a worthwhile goal, this will not be achieved through costly top-down programs with unproven success. Instead, policymakers should seek to work with the private sector and encourage further innovative solutions to improve access to high-quality, high-speed internet. 8. Wasteful Protectionist Mandates. Since taking office, Biden has made gov- ernment procurement increasingly more difficult and more costly. America's doz- ens of domestic content requirements cre- ate burdens for businesses, decrease com- petition for government contracts, and in- crease costs for taxpayers. Biden's executive order in January strengthened domestic content laws and regulations and worked to make it more dif- ficult for companies to acquire waivers to these rules. Biden took another step in July by proposing a new rule to increase the con- tent threshold from 55% to 75% for goods to be considered made in the U.S. The infrastructure bill, which is already riddled with wasteful spending, would en- sure spending that is actually meant for roads, bridges, and other real infrastruc- ture is not spent as wisely as it should be. These rules do include an exception for projects that would cost 25% more if bid to a domestic company, but for taxpayers that means a $50 million project could cost as much as $ 62.5 million before a foreign bid could be considered. Some say the extra cost is worth it to support American jobs, but the truth is that these policies are unlikely to yield job growth in the targeted sectors (such as steel). 9. Modest Progress on Reducing Red Tape. The legislation codifies several reforms initiated under executive order by former President Donald Trump that were rescind- ed by Biden. Among them is the "One Fed- eral Decision" framework, which includes designation of a "lead" agency for each major project to navigate environmental reviews and the compilation of agencies' findings into a single record of decision. Trump also called for reducing the pro- cessing time for environmental reviews to "not more than an average of approximately two years." The bill would ease the Trump requirement, directing lead agencies to de- velop a schedule for completing projects within two years. However, the lead agen- cy may lengthen or shorten the schedule "for good cause"—although not by more than one year. Similarly, the legislation calls for feder- al agencies to issue a "record of decision" within 90 days after an environmental im- pact statement is finalized. Statutory dead- lines are rarely strict, but even a soft dead- line is better than none. A fter all, the aver- age time to complete an environmental im- pact assessment of a transportation project tripled from 2.2 years in the 1970s to 6.6 years by 2011. The bill also includes limitations on the volume of environmental impact state- ments—the average length of which ran 669 pages between 2013 and 2017. If en- acted, agencies would be directed to lim- it environmental impact statements to 200 pages or fewer. Several provisions of the bill also add flexibility to the federal-state dealings for planning and managing highway projects. Projects involving federal land manage- ment agencies would also be streamlined by allowing use of environmental assess- ments previously prepared by the Feder- al Highway Administration for a similar project. The use of existing documenta- tion should apply across the government. Establishing reasonable timelines for National Environmental Policy Act permit- ting and streamlining the process of envi- ronmental assessments will expedite con- struction of new and safer roads, bridges, and highways, as well as cleaner energy in- frastructure—without sacrificing environ- mental protection. Key Takeaway: This Is Not a Reason- able Bill. The bipartisan group promoting the in- frastructure deal are attempting to sell it as a reasonable, centrist compromise. In re- ality, it would greatly expand the size and scope of the federal government, needless- ly add to the national debt, waste hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars, and promote a variety of far-left causes. Improving America's infrastructure is a worthwhile goal that should have bipar- tisan support. This bill isn't the way to do that. David Ditch is a policy analyst in the Gro- ver M. Hermann Center for the Federal Bud- get at The Heritage Foundation. Court Report FELONY Pike County Circuit Court Candace L. Parks charged with count I possession of methamphetamine, a level 6 felony, count II domestic battery, count III possession of marijuana, count IV pos- session of paraphernalia and count V do- mestic battery, prior, a level 6 felony. TRAFFIC AND MISDEMEANORS Pike County Circuit Court Evelio Sargento Roblero charged with knowingly or intentionally operating a motor vehicle without ever receiving a license. Jesse Sherman Maxfield charged with invasion of privacy. Draven L. Hargett charged with pos- session of marijuana. Hannah M. Rocha charged with pos- session of marijuana. CIVIL Pike County Circuit Court Discover Bank C/O Discover Prod- ucts, Inc. sues Brenda Hadley on com- plaint. Aaron Douglas Bellamy sues Angel Lee Bellamy for dissolution of marriage. Keith Ashby sues Christina Jean Ash- by for dissolution of marriage. SMALL CLAIMS Pike County Circuit Court Troy Stewart sues Cheyenne McKan- nan on complaint. INFRACTIONS Pike County Circuit Court Kiara M. Miller charged with speed- ing, exceeding 70 mph. Jean D. Holland charged with speed- ing, exceeding 70 mph. Natalie A. Ansloan charged with speeding, exceeding 55 mph. Morgan W. Ruyle charged with speed- ing, exceeding 70 mph. Jeremy D. Yoder charged with speed- ing, exceeding 70 mph. Michaella F. Woodruff charged with speeding, exceeding 70 mph. Adam W. Commens charged with op- erating a motor vehicle with a false plate. Cordale A. Kenley charged with speed greater than is reasonable for weather conditions. Cameron B. Ponce charged with driv- ing while suspended. Elijah L. Campbell charged with count I driving while suspended and count II speeding, exceeding 55 mph. are irrational fears of trans women." "That's an attempt to shut down conversations," biolo- gist Hilton replies, "and stop people from asking ques- tions." It's working. Many female athletes smile on the podium, raging inside, but remaining silent for fear of losing spon- sorships and prize money. "It's not fair," says Schnee- berger. "To watch a trans- gender female ride away from me like it was nothing, and there's nothing I can do about it, it was torture. I real- ly haven't raced since." John Stossel is author of "Give Me a Break: How I Ex- posed Hucksters, Cheats, and Scam Artists and Became the Scourge of the Liberal Media." INFRASTRUCTURE Continued from page 4 RIGHTS Continued from page 4 UNFAIR Continued from page 4 the same ploy to get people to abandon God and wor- ship him as god. First by vol- untary acceptance, followed by economic edict, and final- ly death. This evil man, the avatar of Satan, will compel people to take his mark and worship him or else no job, no money, no life. Doesn't sound so farfetched now. Scientists will tell you there are no 100 % safe vac- cines. All vaccines carry risk factors. For any scientist to advocate, people should "trust the science" without producing the data, stud- ies, and peer reviews is hid- ing something. There are no studies, independent peer-re- viewed studies, and associ- ated procedures for these COVID vaccines. Why? Because this is a world- wide pandemic and health emergency they exclaim. Millions and millions of peo- ple will die if we wait on sci- ence to follow scientifical- ly established guidelines to develop a vaccine. Caution must be thrown to the wind. Yes, a few thousand people will die because of adverse reactions to the vaccine, but more will live because a vac- cine was rushed into produc- tion. Thomas Jefferson was a man of science and would reject the notion that science knows what is best for every- one. I graduated from univer- sity with an advanced de- gree and trained in the sci- entific method of inquiry. We learned that science is full of contradictions. Often, sever- al scientists will examine the same data and arrive at dif- ferent conclusions. No out- standing scientist will ev- er say that science proves anything. Only lay observ- ers, the untrained, the un- informed, and disingenuous scientists appearing on T V and Cable shows make those statements. Paul had some- thing to say about science. 1Ti 6:20 "O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and con- tradictions of what is falsely called science." Many of the Founding Fa- thers, including Jefferson, believed the rights of every individual are greater than the governments. This cre- ates tension because where do your rights stop and mine start? People have said if you do not take the shot, you're going to kill grandma. It would incense Jefferson to hear such a statement. Jef- ferson believed that the citi- zenry must continually chal- lenge and confront govern- ment because historically, all governments deteriorate into tyranny. People are saying the sooner everyone gets the shot, the sooner we can re- turn to normal. We will nev- er return to normal. 9/11 proves this. Patrick Hen- ry said, "Give me liberty or give me death! " Jesus said, "Lu 21:36 So, whatever you do, don't go to sleep at the switch. Pray constantly that you will have the strength and wits to make it through everything that's coming and end up on your feet be- fore the Son of Man." Think about it. You have nothing to lose except eternal life.