Government Regulations Prevent Job Growth

The nation's job creators consistently cite government overregulation as one of the most significant obstacles to economic growth. Likewise in my August town hall meetings and conversations with Oklahoma business leaders, frustration with government overreach is mentioned again and again as a major barrier to hiring and expansion. An Illinois farmer who confronted President Obama at a town hall meeting spoke for many when he said, "Please don’t challenge us with more rules and regulations from Washington.”

Now we have definitive confirmation that the Obama administration is issuing job-killing regulations at an unprecedented pace. According to the Congressional Research Service, federal agencies have published 175 major rules during the first two years of the Obama administration, which is a 69 percent increase compared to the first two years of President Bush's terms. In 2010 alone, the Obama administration issued 100 major rules, which is the most recorded since the Government Accountability Office began collecting data. Costs from these regulations add up quickly. In response to a request from Speaker Boehner to disclose any pending federal rules with major economic costs, the White House listed seven proposed rules with costs of $1 billion or more. In all, there are 219 regulations in the works that would each cost over $100 million.

Beginning this month, House Republicans will launch a major effort to repeal the most damaging of these regulations. The first regulation we'll tackle is the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) action against Boeing. The NLRB brought a lawsuit against Boeing to prevent the aerospace company from opening a new production line for its 787 airplane in South Carolina. Boeing invested $750 billion to open the new line, which would create 1000 jobs in South Carolina. The problem, according to NLRB? South Carolina is a right-to-work state, and the new jobs would go to non-union workers. NLRB has asked a judge to rule that all 787 assembly work be carried out by union workers in Washington, claiming that Boeing opened the South Carolina production line to retaliate against its unionized Washington workers. Never mind the fact that no Washington workers lost their jobs in the decision. In fact, Washington employees are expected to produce seven of the new planes per month, compared to the new South Carolina plant, which will manufacture three each month. Boeing justifiably argues that its decision to open the new plant in South Carolina was based on sound economic reasons.

At a time of 9 percent unemployment, it is the height of irresponsibility for a government agency to punish a company for creating 1000 new jobs. While the Boeing case slowly works its way through the courts, House Republicans will consider the Protecting Jobs from Government Interference Act, which would prevent the NLRB from dictating where companies can create jobs. This is the first of 10 job-destroying regulations we'll work to repeal this fall, including Obamacare restrictions and the notorious EPA rule to regulate farm dust.

We know from the failed stimulus bill that big government policies do not create jobs -- they simply create more government. To bring the jobless rate down, the best thing the federal government can do is get out of the way and let job creators operate free from burdensome government interference. The Republican agenda to repeal stifling regulations is a true job creation plan.