Our concern is that ... it will create a one-size-fits-all federal system that will marginalize both directors and shareholders.
Getting to an 80 percent or an 83 percent reduction of carbon emission by 2050 is a goal that is just almost impossible for our industry to meet and still produce the fuels that America runs on every day.
[The impact on industries and farmers of dropping the word 'navigable' from the Clean Water Act] could be catastrophic.
This one-size-fits-all approach would distract directors from managing a company, lessen shareholders voice in proposals and director elections, and continue to disenfranchise retail shareholders.
The bottom line is the unions bought the election. It's going to be a sadder day as more businesses leave the state and more don't want to come here.
It has been my hope that other entrepreneurs would similarly pursue their dreams in Oregon. They won't. Measures 66 and 67 should be labeled Oregon's Assisted Suicide Law II. They will allow us to watch a state slowly killing itself. They are anti-business, anti-success, anti-inspirational, anti-humanitarian, and most ironically, in the long run, they will deprive the state of tax revenue, not increase it.
Congress, the administration and the states must recognize that our weak economy simply cannot sustain all the new taxes, regulations and mandates now under consideration. It is a surefire recipe for a double-dip recession or worse.
This proposed action is a major, paper work intensive, rulemaking that will significantly impact our business, both operationally and financially, and will bring little or no benefit towards improving safety of offshore operations. In addition to the unnecessary burden to industry, it will create an additional unwarranted burden to regional MMS staff that will require additional inspector/auditor training and increased workload demand.
[The bill would] have a dramatic impact on the ability of consumers, small businesses, students, and others to get credit at a time when our economy can least afford such constraints.
[Obama’s signing of the Ledbetter act is] a decision that could prove harmful to small business….Without limits, small businesses would be forced into the position of trying to defend an employment decision that occurred in the distant past…Because discrimination cases tend to rely on circumstantial evidence ('he said, she said' testimony), it would serve both parties best to review what occurred immediately after the event, not years later.
