The Cry Wolf Quote Bank chronicles the false predictions and hyperbole by opponents of these laws and protections. While the issues and specific policies change over time, the rhetoric and themes remained the same. You can search the Quote Bank for what opponents said to prevent these laws from passing. Using the drop down menus on the right their statements by issue, by specific law, by who said it and by the core themes they evoke. Elsewhere on the site, you can find articles, studies, and other material that debunks their claims.
“As an industry leader, Chase does not engage in several practices -- universal default, two-cycle billing and increasing a rate based on a change in a credit score -- addressed by the bill, but we believe the legislation as passed today has the potential of increasing overall costs to consumers, reducing access to credit, and reducing or eliminating low-rate options for consumers.”
Legislation likely to result in higher interest rates for consumers is not the answer. [This bill] would broadly constrain the ability of financial institutions to price risk, likely resulting in less access to credit and in higher interest rates for consumers.
[The bill], while well-intentioned, will increase the cost of credit for consumers and small businesses across the country, result in less access to credit for consumers and businesses alike, and may further roil the securities markets -- all at a time when our economy can least afford it.
Every liberal on the campaign trail has a plan to deliver free, socialized medicine, but no country on earth, folks, can possibly pay for every test for everybody without going bankrupt.
Elimination of sections 327 and 328 [of the Safe Water Drinking Act] would not make production of oil and natural gas in the United States any safer, but could substantially increase domestic oil and natural gas production costs, thereby decreasing domestic supply.
To prejudice a narrow sector of the U.S. economy with the aim of funding a broad-based entitlement program is grossly unfair and burdensome to American businesses and consumers.
I’m scared that this provision will add a pretty significant cost. You’re going to see a lot of small guys just close up shop.
The increased cost of labor is folded into a bid for a state contract that is then passed on to the state government (which is funded by taxpayers).
I’m going to have to raise prices for all my drinks and appetizers a dollar and entrees two dollars. I don’t know how else to do it. We are known as the best restaurant city in the world, but we are going to start lagging because there will be a lack of service, a lack of staff in the dining hall. Something has to give.
How can we afford this? You can only charge so much for a hamburger, and then people will stop coming. I'm 52 and was hoping to do this until I retire, but the city is going to force me out of business.
