Opinion … Left/Right | ||||||||||||||||||||
Mountain Views News, Pasadena Edition [Sierra Madre] Saturday, April 8, 2017 | ||||||||||||||||||||
B3 OPINION Mountain Views News Saturday, April 8, 2017 PETER ROFF Mountain Views News PUBLISHER/ EDITOR Susan Henderson PASADENA CITY EDITOR Dean Lee EAST VALLEY EDITOR Joan Schmidt BUSINESS EDITOR LaQuetta Shamblee PRODUCTION Richard Garcia SALES Patricia Colonello 626-355-2737 626-818-2698 WEBMASTER John Aveny DISTRIBUTION Kevin Barry CONTRIBUTORS Chris Leclerc Bob Eklund Howard Hays Paul Carpenter Kim Clymer-Kelley Christopher Nyerges Peter Dills Rich Johnson Merri Jill Finstrom Rev. James Snyder Dr. Tina Paul Katie Hopkins Deanne Davis Despina Arouzman Renee Quenell Marc Garlett Keely Toten One Part of Dodd-Frank That’s Hurting Consumers If I had a dollar for every time a politician tried to push something through Congress they said would protect consumers, I probably would have back all the dollars these efforts have cost me over the years. Somehow things never seem to line up the way they’re promised and we all pay the price. Take the period following the so-called Great Recession. With Barack Obama in the White House and the Democrats in control of both parts of Congress, they couldn’t wait to pass all kinds of new rules and regulations governing banks, mortgage lenders, the consumer finance industry, credit cards, and anybody else they believed we all needed to be protected from. It was crackdown on greed and the voters, aided by a cheerleading cadre of reporters that really don’t understand financial issues but write about them anyway, bought it all. Now that a little bit of time has passed we can see how Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Protection Act of 2010 have actually harmed the same consumers they were meant to help. The worst example of this may be the price controls imposed on debit card transaction fees on the merchants who accept them by the companies that issue them. This came about as the result of pressure from Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, for whom the amendment instituting the caps is named. He thought consumers were being taken advantage of, and thought that capping the interchange fees imposed by the banks would get us all a break. The nation’s’ leading “big box” retailers greatly benefit from the use of debit cards. Transactions process faster (which they like) and that keeps lines moving (which consumers like) and are very convenient (which everybody likes). As soon as the Durbin Amendment passed they started looking for ways to get around the now capped at 21 cents per transaction interchange fees -- down from an average of 1.15 percent of the transaction total value -- many of them felt were unnecessarily punitive. What got lost in the discussion were the high costs associated with the use of debit cards. Convenience comes at a price. So does network maintenance, theft protection, reissuing cards to update their security and a host of other things. Banks and other card issuers used to use the income generated by interchange fees to pay for all that. Once the Durbin Amendment capped what could be charged, card issuers had to look elsewhere to recoup their expenses. Card companies are now charging the same maximum processing fee for smaller transactions as they do for large transactions, saddling small businesses with a sharp increase in business expenses. Debit card use is now limited in many cases and many places have some minimum transaction amount. Free checking has just about gone the way of the passenger pigeon while fees on checking and savings accounts have increased by three to five percent. Just how is any of this better for you and me? If all that were not bad enough, the higher costs the cap has imposed on merchants are, according to a study conducted by George Mason University law school, being passed along to everyone who buys anything in the form of higher prices. Price controls are never a good idea. The ones the Durbin Amendment to Dodd-Frank instituted are especially pernicious because they are hidden so far below the surface. That’s the kind of government-directed activity that produces cronyism, limits consumer choice, raises the price of goods at the point of sale, and redistributes wealth by creating an environment in which smaller Mom and Pop operations and coffee shops are subsidizing more expensive, higher volume purchases made at national chain stores and big box retailers. Whatever Sen. Durbin’s intentions, his amendment did not work out the way he said it would. He should be gracious enough to acknowledge this an offer the language necessary to repeal it as the Senate takes up Dodd-Frank reform and repeal. At the very least, if he would rather just forget the whole thing, he shouldn’t fight to save it when someone else introduces language to knock it out. It is bad policy that produced higher prices and left consumers with fewer protections and conveniences than they had before it became law. ——- © 2017 Peter Roff. Distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. Roff is a former senior political writer for UPI and a well-known commentator based in Washington, D.C. Email him at Peter.Roff@Verizon.net. Mountain Views News has been adjudicated as a newspaper of General Circulation for the County of Los Angeles in Court Case number GS004724: for the City of Sierra Madre; in Court Case GS005940 and for the City of Monrovia in Court Case No. GS006989 and is published every Saturday at 80 W. Sierra Madre Blvd., No. 327, Sierra Madre, California, 91024. All contents are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without the express written consent of the publisher. All rights reserved. All submissions to this newspaper become the property of the Mountain Views News and may be published in part or whole. Opinions and views expressed by the writers printed in this paper do not necessarily express the views and opinions of the publisher or staff of the Mountain Views News. Mountain Views News is wholly owned by Grace Lorraine Publications, Inc. and reserves the right to refuse publication of advertisements and other materials submitted for publication. Letters to the editor and correspondence should be sent to: Mountain Views News 80 W. Sierra Madre Bl. #327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Phone: 626-355-2737 Fax: 626-609-3285 email: mtnviewsnews@aol.com LEFT TURN/RIGHT TURN JOHN L. MICEK DICK POLMAN ALL IS WELL IN TRUMPLANDIA EAST PENNSBORO TWP, Pa. -- President Donald Trump’s approval ratings might be in the tank and his legislative agenda might be foundering on Capitol Hill, but don’t try asking Dan Mosel if he has a case of buyer’s remorse. “No way,” said Mosel, 76, a Trump voter, and one of about 700 conservative activists who packed a hotel ballroom just outside Pennsylvania’s state Capitol last weekend. The president’s Russia troubles? That’s a fever dream of Democrats and the press. The collapse of healthcare reform? That’s House Speaker Paul Ryan’s fault. And don’t sweat tax reform - that’ll happen by August. In short, all is well here in Trumplandia. And Mosel and three of his friends, Rob Boysen, Bill Harper and Don Reimer, were feeling their conservative oats as they plowed through a lunch of deli sandwiches during the Keystone Leadership Conference, an annual shindig mostly put on by local conservative activist and occasional Republican office-seeker Lowman Henry. Over a rainy weekend at a local Radisson hotel, attendees at this lower-case version of the Conservative Political Action Conference heard from an array of prominent figures from the political right, some of them elected, some of them activists and media personalities Speakers included U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey, U.S. Rep. Scott Perry, Andy Schlafly, son of the late conservative firebrand Phyllis Schlafly, and conservative media personalities like Ben Shapiro of The Daily Wire and John Gizzi of NewsMax. The collapse of the Ryancare bill was just fine with the Mosel and his lunchtime colleagues. “The only thing Ryan had to do was introduce the repeal bill that passed 60 times in the House,” said Harper, who hails from Bucks County, a purplish Philadelphia suburb. “That would get the Freedom Caucus and a bill that would be acceptable to all sides.” In his speech to activists, Perry predicted an eventual return to healthcare, saying Republicans needed to “get back in the huddle.” “We just want to do what we told our voters we were going to do,” he said “I don’t want to criticize the play call. From my standpoint, we could have had an alternative. I don’t want to replace their version of socialism with our version of socialism,” he said. The Freedom Caucus’ reticence prompted an angry Tweet from Trump, who took the bizarre step of threatening to run against them in 2018 if they failed to get onside. “The Freedom Caucus will hurt the entire Republican agenda if they don’t get on the team, & fast. We must fight them, & Dems, in 2018!” Trump wrote. That move left Mosel and his friends shaking their heads. “If he runs against conservatives, he’s going to lose support,” Boysen, also a Bucks County resident, said. “Going against the Freedom Caucus is a bad move on his part.” The lunch-time gang also said Ryan might run aground if he’s not careful. Some activists have said it might be time to change horses in the Speaker’s office. “If Ryan keeps doing what he’s doing, there’ll be a big push to get him out of there,” Boysen said. “He pushed this bad bill and the Freedom Caucus saw through it.” With the Senate Judiciary Committee set to vote Monday to send Judge Neil Gorsuch’s Supreme Court nomination to the Senate floor, Toomey foreshadowed a major showdown with Democrats led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Republicans will do “whatever it takes” to get Gorsuch over the goal line, Toomey told the crowd. And that includes invoking the so-called “nuclear option” to pass him by a simple majority, rather than the usual 60 votes. “In an interview following his speech, Toomey said “to the extent that it’s possible for me to be confident, I feel the confident the votes are there,” to break the 60-vote threshold and approve Gorsuch with a simple majority. “I think so,” he said, when he was asked about the vote count. “It’s not as though we haven’t discussed this among ourselves. There’s nobody I know in the Republican Conference who is looking forward to having to do that. But there’s nobody that I know of in the Republican conference who thinks we should have a four- or eight-year series of vacancies on the Supreme Court.” And when it comes to Trump’s Russia troubles and the mess surrounding House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, the lunch gang shrugged it off. “It’s all the Democrats have been talking about,” said Reimer, who hails from Montgomery County, a majority-Democrat Philly suburb. Asked if he thought Nunez should recuse himself, Mosel snorted and said, “Who’s he going to hand it over to? Trey Gowdy,” the former House GOP Benghazi inquisitor. Reimer finished the thought, “It’s a Democratic ploy.” Yep ... all is well here in Trumplandia. —— © Copyright 2017 John L. Micek, distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. An award-winning political journalist, Micek is the Opinion Editor and Political Columnist for PennLive/The Patriot-News in Harrisburg, Pa. Readers may follow him on Twitter @ByJohnLMicek and email him at jmicek@pennlive.com. IS BILL O’REILLY TOO BIG TO FAIL? Fox News, where women work at their own risk in a misogynist culture frozen somewhere in the 1950s, is back in crisis mode. Nine months after chairman and accused sexual harasser Roger Ailes was forced out, we’re wondering whether accused sexual harasser Bill O’Reilly will be forced out, too. Don’t hold your breath. I don’t write much about O’Reilly, although it was fun two years ago to recount his phony boasts of covering a war that was actually 1,000 miles away from his hotel. But now attention must be paid, because his new flap is for the highest stakes. It’s morals versus money. Advertisers are currently fleeing “The O’Reilly Factor,” indicating in press releases that they prefer not to be associated with an old-school male chauvinist who has cost his company $13 million to settle sexual harassment claims. The news about O’Reilly - who allegedly made sexual advances to his five female accusers, and when rebuked, hurt the women’s careers - broke bigly over the weekend, and more than dozen bailing sponsors have scrambled onto the high road. Mercedes-Benz is patting itself on the back: “The allegations are disturbing and, given the importance of women in every aspect of our business, we don’t feel this is a good environment in which to advertise our products right now.” Ditto clothing company UNTICKit: “It is important that our corporate partners reflect the same principals of inclusivity and equality upon which we have built our brand.” Ditto the pharmaceutical company Bayer, which says it “supports a safe, respectful and non-abusive environment for women.” All very noble. But let’s not get carried away, because the firms are ultimately beholden to the business of making money. These sponsors are merely shifting their ads to other Fox shows, which means that O’Reilly’s notoriety isn’t costing Fox News a penny. Plus, the network gets most of its revenue from licensing fees paid by cable and satellite operators, so it’s cushioned from any sponsor rebellion. And if the sponsors truly wanted to take a moral stand, they’d bail on Fox News entirely. After all, the network, which claims to have “zero tolerance” for sexual harassment, just renewed its contract with O’Reilly last year after it paid off female accusers. Unfortunately, the sponsors have shown no interest in cutting the cord completely. Granted, ad boycotts have worked on occasion. MSNBC nixed the simulcast of Don Imus’ radio show, and Glenn Beck left Fox News after sponsors fled his TV program. But Bill O’Reilly may be too big to fail. To use the mob’s terminology, O’Reilly is an earner. He makes $18 million a year, which is dwarfed by the bucks his show brings in: $446 million ad-revenue dollars got pumped into Fox coffers between 2014 and 2016. That’s likely deemed to be more important to Fox executives than the sex harassment stuff - like, for instance, the allegation that O’Reilly told one woman to buy a vibrator, and serenaded the same woman by phone with masturbation noises. By the way, O’Reilly says he has never harassed anyone, that he routinely draws accusers just because he’s famous, and that he and Fox have paid off the women because “I’m a father who cares deeply for my children...I have put to rest any controversies to spare my children.” In February 2016 he lost custody of his children, who said they wanted to live with their mother. Bottom line is, money talks. One Fox source told New York magazine’s Gabriel Sherman (the journalist with the best Fox sources), “The impact of these boycotts can be cosmetic. The feeling is, let’s keep our heads down and hope this blows over.” Which may well happen. Here’s another remark, from a different source: “We’ve seen this many times in the past. Some of the advertisers that left will come back, and some will be replaced. Life will go on.” That remark was uttered in 2012 by Michael Harrison, who publishes a talk radio magazine. He was referring to Rush Limbaugh - who, at the time, was hemorrhaging advertisers after he ridiculed a law student, a birth control user, as a “slut” and a “prostitute.” You may remember that flap. Scores of big-ticket advertisers, from Capitol One to Quicken Loans, said they would no longer do business with Rush. Critics gleefully tallied the boycotters and awaited Rush’s downfall. Last August, Rush inked a new contract with his overlords at Premiere Radio Networks - for another four years. You get my point. Perhaps Peggy Drexler, an author and gender scholar, is right when she says that the O’Reilly scandal will ultimately help women - “the more we hear about...the mistreatment of women in the workplace and anywhere, the more women are likely to band together to hasten that change” - but Rupert Murdoch and his old-boy underlings are fine with Fox’s toxic culture if it works for the balance sheet. ——- Copyright 2017 Dick Polman, distributed exclusively by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate. Dick Polman is the national political columnist at NewsWorks/WHYY in Philadelphia (newsworks.org/polman) and a “Writer in Residence” at the University of Pennsylvania. Email him at dickpolman7@gmail.com. Mountain Views News Mission Statement The traditions of community news- papers and the concerns of our readers are this newspaper’s top priorities. We support a prosperous community of well- informed citizens. We hold in high regard the values of the exceptional quality of life in our community, including the magnificence of our natural resources. Integrity will be our guide. Mountain Views News 80 W Sierra Madre Blvd. No. 327 Sierra Madre, Ca. 91024 Office: 626.355.2737 Fax: 626.609.3285 Email: editor@mtnviewsnews.com Website: www.mtnviewsnews.com | ||||||||||||||||||||