President Obama will release his annual budget proposal late yet again. Choosing the date is not merely a convention. By law, the President must release the budget by the first Monday in February, which falls on February 6 this year. Yet yesterday the Administration announced it will release its fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget a week late, marking the third such delay in four years. Right now, when the economy is struggling, annual deficits consistently exceed $1 trillion, and Americans are demanding that Washington govern responsibly, this delay is beyond frustrating. Especially after last year’s protracted budget battle, a prompt submission would have signaled that the President is ready to get down to business. Unfortunately, the opposite now seems imminent.

The budget provides the President a formal venue in which to communicate his priorities, and it illuminates the fiscal path down which he would lead the country. If this year President Obama proposes the same failed policies of past budgets, the country will plod deeper into the present fiscal crisis—not out of it.

For example, Obama’s 2012 budget would have put debt held by the public on track to rise from its current level of about 70 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) to more than 87 percent of GDP by 2021. As this Budget Chart Book chart by The Heritage Foundation shows, that amounts to double the post–WWII average.

That same budget failed to include the kinds of rational, market-based solutions necessary to fix the three major entitlement programs—Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—which are currently set on spending autopilot. The chart below shows that more than half of the President’s 2012 budget would have been spent on entitlement programs.

The picture only gets worse from here. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that annual spending on all entitlement programs will increase from $2 trillion in 2011 to nearly $3.3 trillion in 2021. That’s almost the size of all federal spending today.

CBO estimates that spending on just the three major entitlement programs will increase from 10.4 percent of GDP in 2011 to 12.4 percent of GDP in 2021. With baby boomers starting to retire and health care costs rising, that figure will jump to 16.4 percent of GDP by 2035 and to nearly 19 percent of GDP by 2050.

Because Obama’s past budgets put off reforming entitlements, more debt (or taxpayer dollars) will go toward them than would be needed otherwise. Delay is not the solution. What is needed are good ideas and political will from the President and Congress to reform these programs so they work better and are more affordable. Entitlement reform means the programs will actually be around for seniors who need them, and it means future generations won’t find themselves saddled with sky-high tax rates to pay for entitlements. In the President’s budget proposal this year, he should be honest about what doing nothing to tackle entitlement programs means for the country’s spending and debt crisis. Then he should offer his plan to solve that problem.

President Obama’s past budget proposals did little if anything to address Washington’s spending crisis. Ignoring entitlements—the real drivers of future deficits—only made things worse. This time around, the President should lay out a truly bold vision for America: one that will tackle the grave challenges presented by entitlement programs, fully fund the nation’s defense capabilities, and lay the groundwork for a robust, thriving economy though fundamental tax reform. If the President needs ideas, he should look to The Heritage Foundation’s Saving the American Dream plan, which would accomplish all of these goals.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde has been talking up the need for greatly expanded resources to bail out ailing European economies.

European nations have offered to channel about $200 billion of their own funds to themselves through the IMF (a kind of gentleman’s money-laundering to avoid restrictions in their own treaties). Lagarde wants others to add $300 billion to that kitty.

The U.S. Treasury has said no, and rightly so. Replacing current euro-debt with IMF loans, no matter how rigorously structured, will only prolong the agony. The failing euro-zone economies need to get their fiscal and economic houses in order. That means reining in government spending now, not more debt, and aggressively pursuing economic policies such as labor market reforms that can ignite growth rather than paying lip service to growth as a throwaway line at the end of a speech.

Even talking about the possibility of big IMF bailouts may be having a negative impact, because it suggests more time and more debt before real action is taken. The governments and their lenders were reportedly close last week to a deal in which bond-holders would accept 50 cents on the dollar for their current debt. Now that deal is in trouble.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Leading up to his third State of the Union (SOTU) address tonight, President Obama appears once again less interested in facilitating real job growth than in creating the mere appearance of job creation.

In a SOTU preview video released over the weekend, Obama declared that American energy fueled by homegrown and alternative energy sources is an important step toward rebuilding the economy. This statement in conjunction with last week’s rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline suggests a continuation of the misguided focus on the government pushing so-called “green jobs,” whether they work or not, while blocking job-creating private-sector investments in energy.

Last week, President Obama rejected the permit application to build the Keystone XL pipeline, a truly shovel-ready project that would have lifted up the U.S. economy with private-sector investment, real jobs, and lower prices for a significant production input factor: energy. As Heritage policy analyst Nick Loris highlights:

Building the pipeline would bring over 700,000 barrels of oil per day and directly create 20,000 truly shovel-ready jobs. The Canadian Energy Research Institute estimates that current pipeline operations and the addition of the Keystone XL pipeline would create 179,000 American jobs by 2035.

Just the week before the fateful Keystone decision, additional documentation was released showing that the White House had knowledge of impending layoffs at the now-bankrupt solar company Solyndra before the 2010 midterm elections. This is in addition to an earlier revelation that the Department of Energy pushed to withhold this information until afterward.

Recipient of a $535 million taxpayer-funded loan guarantee and previously poster child for President Obama’s objective to increase renewable energy and green jobs in America, Solyndra’s troubles raised serious political concerns for officials in the White House. Once the news over Solyndra’s filing for bankruptcy broke last summer, a scandal and congressional investigation ensued, questioning the Administration’s green energy “investments.” About 1,100 people were laid off as the taxpayer-subsidized solar company went under.

This goes to show some of the problems inherent in the government sponsoring what should be private enterprises. The issue here is the President’s overall track record when it comes to blocking energy-related jobs from reliable and affordable energy sources while handing taxpayer money to producers of unreliable and costly alternative energy whose “green jobs” are a fallacy. This is no way to strengthen the economy.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Yesterday in Walt Disney World, the land “where dreams come true,” President Barack Obama appeared before Cinderella’s Castle to announce his latest plan to boost jobs in America–an effort to increase tourism to the United States. His announcement came one day after he flat out said “NO” to another plan that would have directly created at least 20,000 truly shovel-ready jobs–and 179,000 American jobs by 2035–while bringing more than 700,000 barrels of oil to the United States each day. That plan was the Keystone XL pipeline.

Had the President approved Keystone, a 1,700-mile pipeline would have been extended from Alberta, Canada, to Texas refineries — lifting up the U.S. economy with private-sector investment, putting people to work, and helping increase the supply of energy to lower prices when fuel costs are through the roof. Despite a finding by the State Department that the pipeline would pose minimal environmental risk, environmentalists were still up in arms and lobbied the President to say no to the plan.

The President’s decision is so out of line with fact and reason that The Washington Post strongly condemned it in an op-ed yesterday, saying the “pipeline rejection is hard to accept” and “We almost hope this was a political call because, on the substance, there should be no question.” As the Post explained, even without the pipeline, Canada will still export its oil–but across the ocean to China, instead. Meanwhile, the United States will continue importing crude oil from the Middle East. In other words, the environmental lobby might have stanched the flow of oil from Canada, but it’s being diverted onto the seas, and fossil fuel consumption will necessarily continue.

The environmental left’s “victory” is ultimately another loss for the American people — especially the 13.1 million unemployed workers. It’s a loss for small businesses, such as restaurants and hotels, in the towns along the proposed route. It’s a loss for state budgets that would have seen billions in tax revenue as a result. And it’s also a loss for those who are struggling with high energy costs.

Gas prices are at a record high for January and are 28.5 cents per gallon higher than a year ago. And that’s expected to go even higher–some analysts predict that the national average for a gallon of regular unleaded could hit $4 to $4.25 per gallon by the spring.

One might think that given the high cost of energy, the President would be seeking to increase domestic production, especially given Iran’s threats to block the Strait of Hormuz, thereby cutting off a quarter of the world’s energy supply. Think again. Under President Obama, oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago, 2010 had the lowest number of leases issued for oil and gas production on federal lands since 1984, and the Administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011.

There is one bright spot in the nation for energy production: North Dakota. Overall energy production has increased thanks to the state’s pro-energy policies, and North Dakota has reaped the benefits, as have other like-minded states, as Heritage’s Rob Bluey reports:

North Dakota’s unemployment rate is 3.4 percent, the lowest in the country. According to a recent report from IHS Global Insight, North Dakota already returned to pre-recession employment along with energy-rich Alaska. Texas is expected to do so in the first quarter of 2012, followed by Nebraska and South Dakota next year.

There’s much more that could be done, though, to move America further toward safely developing energy resources here at home–and the Keystone XL pipeline would be one such step. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will hold a hearing to review legislation that would restart the project, focusing on a bill introduced by Representative Lee Terry (R-NE), which would allow construction on the pipeline to begin a month after passage. Heritage’s Nicolas Loris explains that “a simple, effective approach would be for Congress to authorize the pipeline application as submitted by TransCanada pursuant to its authority to regulate commerce with other nations.”

Sadly, this action wouldn’t have been necessary if President Obama put the interests of the American people before his own political interests. He could have green-lighted the Keystone XL pipeline this week and helped create real jobs and increase the supply of affordable, reliable energy, without spending public dollars or advocating tax hikes. But instead he headed for the Magic Kingdom and continued to spin the fantasy that he has the answers for job creation in America. In the meantime, Americans can only dream of a stronger economy and a brighter future.

Quick Hits:

• The U.S. Justice Department is bringing racketeering, money laundering and Internet piracy charges against seven individuals allegedly operating a huge criminal enterprise as part of Megaupload, a popular online file sharing website.
  
• Voters in South Carolina head to the polls tomorrow in the next Republican primary election.
• France is suspending training operations in Afghanistan after four French soldiers were killed and more than a dozen were wounded when an Afghan soldier opened fire on his trainers.
• Syria’s opposition movement is calling for a day of protests against the country’s government. Meanwhile, the Arab League is deciding whether to continue its month-long mission to monitor Syria’s government and its pledge to end the violent crackdown on protesters.
• LUNCHTIME WEB CHAT: Join us today from 12 PM to 1 PM as we discuss President Obama’s decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline. Click here to participate!

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Stories are powerful. They help us relate to other individuals and communicate complex issues. They are an essential ingredient to making policy change in Washington. That’s why we’re asking for your help.

The Heritage Foundation is seeking examples of individuals, entrepreneurs and business owners who have been negatively affected by the federal government’s regulatory overreach. We want to spotlight Americans’ experiences with Washington’s red tape. You can help us by filling out the form below.

Our goal at Heritage is to reduce government interference and eliminate unwarranted government intrusion into the economy.

We can fight back against the federal Leviathan with your help. If you know of an actual example of the negative consequences of regulation, tell us. Or if you have heard a story we should investigate, please share it as well.

Here are some examples of regulatory horror stories we’ve already featured:

• Mike and Chantell Sackett took their case against the Environmental Protection Agency all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. We interviewed attorney Damien Schiff about what it means for U.S. land owners who encounter EPA bureaucrats.
• Armed federal agents raided Gibson Guitar last August on suspicion that it violated the Lacey Act The company’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, fought back and defended Gibson against the federal government’s persecution.
• Obamacare is already having a crippling impact on businesses across America as they brace for changes to health insurance. Scott Womack, an IHOP owner from Terre Haute, Ind., told us he’s rethinking his expansion plans as a consequence of the law.
• Louisiana businesses are still recovering from the Obama administration’s offshore drilling moratorium following the 2010 oil spill. Washington bureaucrats are approving permits at a glacial pace, forcing Seahawk Drilling into bankruptcy. Others, like Leslie Bertucci of R and D Enterprises, are struggling to survive.

Please fill out the form below to share your story. You can also contact us at scribe@heritage.org.

Loading…

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness released its third report January 17 entitled “Road Map to Renewal,” a worthy description of serious issues affecting the American economy coupled with set of proposals that, with few exceptions, can best be described as pretty thin gruel.

The council—chaired by Jeffrey R. Immelt, the chairman and CEO of GE—was obviously constrained in many cases by political considerations imposed on it either by the Obama Administration or by itself as it recognized the political season.

However, this report will likely be best known for the quickness with which its own sponsor, President Obama, loudly “dissed” it, in the urban vernacular.

At least with Obama’s 2010 Simpson–Bowles deficit commission, the President waited a couple of months before embarrassingly ignoring the commission’s recommendations in toto. In the case of the Jobs Council report, the President set a new land speed record of about 24 hours before explicitly repudiating one of the council’s key recommendations.

The council’s report sensibly observes that the United States will need to “optimize all of its natural resources and construct pathways (pipelines, transmission and distribution) to deliver electricity and fuel.” One of the council’s reasonable recommendations from an earlier report was to “streamline environmental permitting” to expedite the review of infrastructure projects, such as transmission and distribution pipelines.

On January 18, the day after the release of the Jobs Council report, President Obama killed the Keystone XL pipeline that would have carried oil from Canada’s bounteous fields to waiting Gulf Coast refineries, creating tens of thousands of jobs now and greatly reducing the nation’s exposure to Middle East oil for decades to come. Now, thanks to Obama’s cowtowing to the environmental lobby, the Canadians will apparently build a pipeline to the Pacific Ocean to ship the oil to China for their economy to use. No doubt the Chinese will appreciate the magnanimous gesture, but it seems unlikely that the President’s council, not to mention America’s struggling workers, will do likewise.

The Keystone fiasco aside, one of the more curious elements of the council’s report is its emphasis on American manufacturing. A common perception is that America’s manufacturers are steadily and inexorably losing ground to foreign competition, a perception reinforced by the persistent reminder of foreign car brands on the nation’s highways and a steady decline in manufacturing employment. Fortunately, the perception is largely wrong.

It is certainly true that employment in manufacturing has fallen in recent decades. The council’s report observes that in 1980, manufacturing accounted for about 20 percent of American jobs, whereas the comparable figure today is about 9 percent. At the same time, manufacturing’s share of total production has remained roughly stable and, in fact, the United States and China are the only countries to have gained significant world share in manufacturing in recent years. The line that connects and explains these two dots of strong manufacturing and manufacturing job loss is the rapid increase in labor productivity, the result of innovation, and global competitive pressures.

With this strong performance in manufacturing, why, then, does the report suggest that we need to tilt the nation’s economic policy focus even more toward manufacturing? To be sure, as the report affirms, “Manufacturing matters.” But so, too, do health care services, financial services, and many other sectors. The extra emphasis placed on an apparently relatively healthy economic sector loudly smacks of an unjustified and unjustifiable policy bias and an unhealthy sense of government-knows-best industrial planning.

In other areas, the report includes a useful discussion of the role of federal regulations and “how best to strike a balance between competing public objectives” of job creation on the one hand and the need to achieve regulatory intent on the other. Unfortunately, the preponderance of the discussion and recommendations involve trying to rationalize the regulatory review process for new regulations, which are grains of sand compared to the massive mountain of existing regulations. The council’s focus should have been on how to clear away some of the mountain.

Only the third recommendation in the regulation discussion touches on the mountain, calling for a “retrospective review of rules and their impact,” directing the badly outgunned and undermanned Office of Independent Regulatory Analysis (OIRA) within the White House’s Office of Management and Budget to “provide guidance on how agencies should prioritize the review of rules and develop and implement a system for retrospective review in the future.” In effect, OIRA is to develop a plan for a system to devise a review of how to study what agencies might like to consider. That’s Washington-speak for “do nothing.”

The one really bright spot in the report is the call for tax reform, especially the need to simplify the corporate income tax and reduce the corporate income tax rate, which, as of April 1 (when Japan finally reduces its rate), will be the highest in the industrialized world at 39.2 percent. Unfortunately, the report is silent on the closely related issue of the need to reform the rest of the tax system, especially the taxation of non-corporate businesses, such as partnerships and sole proprietorships. It is unreasonable and implausible to imagine that the federal government could or would substantially simplify the tax system and cut the tax rate facing the largest businesses while leaving small and medium-sized businesses stuck with the old, complex system and high tax rates.

The Jobs Council has added useful ideas and recommendations to the nation’s policy menu. Many of these are quite modest in scope, and some are misguided or suggest an errant focus, but overall the council’s work has borne fruit. One can only hope that some of the better ideas from the council’s report receive a moment’s consideration in the White House before being squashed by President Obama, as with the Keystone decision.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

The People’s Republic of China’s (PRC’s) relationship with Iran receives a good deal of attention. As the U.S. considers how to stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program short of military action, the PRC is considered vital in ensuring economic sanctions are effective. But it has been difficult to win Chinese cooperation in applying sanctions. One mistake the U.S. may have made is treating China as a unified entity.

It is true, of course, that the PRC has a tightly controlled political system. There is one ruling party, a powerless legislature, and muzzled debate. Even so, distinct interests have emerged.

State-owned enterprises rarely operated internationally a decade ago and, if they did, unfailingly followed the central government line, as when China Unicom was nationalized in 1999. One outcome of state-led development since 2003 is powerful growth by state firms. By some measures, State Grid is the world’s biggest power company, China Mobile the biggest telecom, and ICBC the biggest bank.

The PRC’s global presence is also much greater. Chinese firms are the world’s biggest exporters. From 2005 to 2011, Chinese outward investment exceeded $300 billion, even excluding bonds.

China’s corporate kings are the two largest oil companies, both state-owned: CNPC and Sinopec. Both rank in Fortune’s top 10 globally. They are the two biggest owners of foreign non-bond assets, accounting for more than 25 percent of outward investment—more than $80 billion—by themselves. CNPC and Sinopec own stakes in Canadian oil projects; CNPC sends Venezuelan oil to the U.S. for refining; and Sinopec has just made a sizable U.S. shale deal. They also have made large acquisitions in Europe.

Iran has been an important target, with CNPC and Sinopec each having multibillion-dollar projects. However, there are indications that both, along with smaller cousin China National Offshore Oil, have slowed recent work. Why? It probably wasn’t orders from Beijing. Rather, proceeding with their considerable business in Iran in the face of sanctions would put much more of their global business at risk.

More important, the internal political role of these companies is underappreciated. When push comes to shove, they follow government orders. But they first do some nudging of their own. CNPC and Sinopec are the two biggest contributors of tax revenue. They directly employ more than 2 million people and are crucial to the jobs of many more. They are vital in Beijing’s strategy of securing ever-growing oil imports. Thus, their relationship with the central government is no longer one-way, and they cannot be happy with the prospect of the PRC bucking stronger international sanctions.

This is the proper context in which to understand the decision by the Obama Administration to punish Chinese company Zhuhai Zhenrong. It will accomplish nothing in itself, but it will catch the attention of CNPC and Sinopec, as Zhenrong is also a centrally controlled energy enterprise (if much smaller).

The U.S. cannot negotiate directly with CNPC and Sinopec. It certainly should not expect them to defy the Communist Party. But welcoming Sinopec investment here while sanctioning Zhenrong sends an indirect signal. Because China is not a single entity, such signals are likely to prove more effective than traditional policy has been.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

The United States is at a crossroads. Over the course of the next 10 months, Americans will watch as the future of our country is debated — state by state, county by county, and town by town. In the 2012 presidential election, voters will make a fundamental decision that will have vast implications for future generations and the very survival of the American dream.

That’s why today The Heritage Foundation and the Family Research Council (FRC) are proud to embark on a bus tour designed to tell Americans about practical, conservative solutions to the most critical issues confronting the nation. With a banner proclaiming “Your Money, Your Values, Your Vote,” our Values Bus will roll into Charleston, South Carolina, this morning for our first event outside TD Arena at the College of Charleston. And we’ll be joined by a very special guest — South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. From there, the bus tour will roll on until the November 6 presidential election.

Along the way, Heritage will emphasize restoring fiscal responsibility through its Saving the American Dream plan, and FRC will stress critical values issues during our joint voter education and registration campaign.

Right now, our nation is on the wrong path. If nothing is done, our children and grandchildren will experience not liberty and prosperity, but more crushing debt, higher taxes, and job-killing regulations. Meanwhile, the values that Americans hold so dear–that form the bedrock of our civil society–are under a dangerous assault.

As a result, unlike any generation before us, we face the very real possibility that our grandchildren may be worse off than we are. This tour will set forth policies and ideas that turn America around on behalf of those future generations. And it will speak to the views held by millions of American voters who want to see a return to our country’s core values: restoring fiscal sanity, protecting marriage, safeguarding religious liberty and defending the rights of the unborn.

In order to tackle America’s fiscal crisis, Heritage has proposed a plan that would balance the budget within 10 years without raising taxes, reform our entitlement programs so they can provide for those who need it without bankrupting the future, reform our tax code to make it fairer and flatter, and encourage savings, repeal Obamacare, and fully fund a strong national defense to ensure America’s security as the Constitution requires.

FRC’s focus will be the importance of the family structure as well as protecting life and religious liberty. To make sure those who share in our values are also engaged in the political process, FRC will be concentrating on identifying grassroots activists and giving them the tools to register to vote their neighbors and friends.

In the months ahead, Heritage and FRC plan to take our bus tour to states across the country including stops in Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. As our bus crosses thousands of miles, from east to west and north to south, we will bring our innovative ideas to an America in search of answers. But while some of our ideas might be new, the values we stand for are those already cherished by millions of Americans and that have been with us since the founding. And it is those values–and the American dream–that we must save for future generations.

Co-authored by Edwin Feulner, president of The Heritage Foundation, and Tony Perkins, president of The Family Research Council.

Click here to view the Values Bus Tour schedule.

Quick Hits:

• President Obama yesterday said “NO” to the Keystone XL pipeline, turning his back on as many as 179,000 jobs and over 700,000 barrels of oil per day. Read our analysis on The Foundry.
• In turning his back on Keystone XL, the President claimed that “domestic oil and natural gas production is up” under his Administration. What he didn’t say is that his Administration can’t actually take any credit for the increase.
• Under President Obama, oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago. Read more about the President’s failed energy strategy on The Foundry.
• The Washington Post weighed in on the President’s Keystone XL decision, saying that the “pipeline rejection is hard to accept” because, “on the substance, there should be no question.”
• The House Energy and Commerce Committee has scheduled a hearing to review legislation that would restart the Keystone XL project, giving oversight responsibility to an agency that some say is less politically motivated than the White House.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

In his announcement rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline today, President Obama boasted that under his administration, “domestic oil and natural gas production is up.” Obama, of course, failed to mention that his administration can’t actually take any credit for the increase.

The vast majority of America’s new oil and gas production is happening on private lands in states like North Dakota, Alaska and Texas.

It’s not that Obama is devoid of responsibility. His administration oversees oil and gas production on federal lands by issuing leases. But when measuring oil and gas production in areas under Obama’s jurisdiction, the numbers tell a different story.

Citing publicly available federal data, the House Natural Resources Committee noted these figures:

• Oil and natural gas production on federal lands is down by more than 40 percent compared to 10 years ago.

• Under the Obama administration, 2010 had the lowest number of onshore leases issued since 1984.

• The Obama administration held only one offshore lease sale in 2011.

Despite the Obama administration’s restrictive policies for oil and gas production on federal lands, overall production still increased thanks to the pro-energy policies in states like North Dakota.

“North Dakota has been the poster child for what can happen when we unleash free enterprise and allow states to develop and commercialize their resources,” Heritage’s Nick Loris wrote recently on The Foundry. “North Dakota is drilling at record pace.”

The result: North Dakota’s unemployment rate is 3.4 percent, the lowest in the country. According to a recent report from IHS Global Insight, North Dakota already returned to pre-recession employment along with energy-rich Alaska. Texas is expected to do so in the first quarter of 2012, followed by Nebraska and South Dakota next year.

Those states all have something in common: energy production.

That policy aligns with recommendations from Obama’s own Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, which yesterday issued a report calling for more energy production that includes drilling and pipelines. Here’s the language from the Jobs Council report:

As a nation, we need to take advantage of all our natural resources to spur economic growth, create jobs and reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil. First, we should allow more access to oil, natural gas and coal opportunities on federal lands. Where sources of shale natural gas have been uncovered, federal, state and local authorities should encourage its safe and responsible extraction. While the administration has supported holding additional lease sales and evaluating new areas for drilling, further expanding and expediting the domestic production of fossil fuels both offshore and onshore (in conjunction with more electric and natural gas vehicles) will reduce America’s reliance on foreign oil and the huge outflow of U.S. dollars this reliance entails. In addition, policies that encourage rapid lease development while emphasizing the highest safety standards will ensure companies responsibly drill for natural gas or oil and mine for coal or other our minerals in federal areas in a timely manner.

With the Keystone XL decision, Obama rejected that advice. “At a time when unemployment remains unacceptably high, Iran is threatening the Strait of Hormuz, and Canada is looking to take this oil elsewhere, it is difficult to understand how the President could say no to thousands of jobs and an increase in energy supply from our ally,” Loris wrote in reaction to the decision.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.

Barron’s published its year-end roundtable discussion with 10 money managers and financial market experts on Saturday. The star investors voiced their concerns about three government-related problems that threaten economic growth and prosperity in this country.

1. Cumbersome government regulations are holding businesses back and discouraging investors from investing in American companies.

Mark Faber, editor and publisher of the Gloom, Boom, and Doom Report in Hong Kong, warns, “The regulatory environment is bad under the current administration. I don’t see a lot of people wanting to invest in the U.S. Statistics show that net capital formation is negative.”

2. Runaway government debt caused by foolish government spending is a “ticking time bomb” that already has caused entrepreneurial activity to stagnate.

Faber: “It would be best for all governments to cut spending by 50 percent. Then the private sector would expand again.”

Scott Black, founder and president of Delphi Management in Boston, adds:

The U.S. doesn’t have the same financial flexibility today that it had in 1979 and 1980. Government debt is 100% of GDP, compared with 32.6% then. The huge debt overhang is a ticking time bomb.… As Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is great until you run out of other people’s money. That’s what has happened here, and the imbalances of the past 40 or 50 years aren’t going to be rectified with a stroke of a pen.… We have to overhaul the tax code, and we should follow the path set by Simpson-Bowles [the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform].

3. Money printing causes inflation in the prices of life’s necessities for the poor and for everyone else, but it increases the price of financial assets like stocks that the poor don’t own. This injects a class rift into society between rich and poor.

Felix Zulauf, president of Zulauf Asset Management in Switzerland, explains:

Money-printing is splitting society. It is only a question of time until there is a social backlash. It will result in dramatic changes in the political arena, the economic agenda and the tax agenda. Corporate profits might not look like what we’re expecting today.

The Barron’s roundtable describes a future that is bleak unless changes are made. Now is not the time for imposing record-breaking red tape on American businesses. Now is not the time to be “spending our way out of debt.”

Now is the time, however, for the Federal Reserve to turn off the gushing money printing spigots and for the government to start paying back its debt. For details on how the federal government could reduce its debt and support stronger economic activity, see Heritage’s fiscal plan, Saving the American Dream.

Article brought to you by The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation.