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.
With the Environmental Protection Agency laws, we’d either have to shut down or break the law, and we aren’t going to break the law.
If we sell too many big cars in any quarter in 1978, we’ll have to hold back our product mix and we’ll have to ration or allocate cars. The law is final now, but if enough people complain when they can’t get a big car, maybe the government will revise its legislation. To meet 27.5 m.p.g. by ’85, the average weight of cars will have to be about 3,200 pounds versus 4,000 pounds now. That means every car would be a compact, subcompact, or smaller. The new law implies that we must get better fuel economy between 1980 and 1985 then between 1978 and 1980. That’s unlikely.
If we sell too many big cars, we’ll have to stop building them. Then we’ll have to ram small cars down consumers’ throats and use dealer incentives to get rid of them so that we can build big cars again. The public is going to rebel because these hard-to-get big cars will then sell for full list or higher when the small cars are being given away.
The conflict between government standards and market demands is increased by the rollback of petroleum prices and extension of petroleum price controls at the same time. By making gasoline cheaper, congress has encouraged consumer demand for larger cars, while at the same time imposing fuel economy standards that require stronger demand for small cars.
In California, Mexican farm workers are no longer allowed to use the short-handled hoe they have used for generations; now they are required to use long-handled American type hoes. . . .This is not because the workers or the farmers want to change: but apparently because the city people, driving by, feel more comfortable watching the workers use the kind of hoes that look good through car windows.
In many cases, the net effect of government regulations is a burden on consumers, taxpayers, and business which is much greater than the benefits.
Government regulatory activities frequently result in much overlapping and duplication of effort, contradictory requirements, and an increasing drag on productive economic activities.
This bill could affect the business of every executive in this room. It could affect the entire national economy and the private lives of every American citizen.
What appears to be simple government planning, to achieve what seem to be worthwhile goals, will absolutely degenerate into total planning. It will encompass production numbers, product design, and ultimately product ownership. And whether you want to call the enemy government planning, or government establishment of goals, there is only one name for it. It is Socialism. If that’s what you want, you have no problem. Just do nothing. And the liberals will elect people to Congress who will give it to you.
S. 1795 could extend the authority of government into a takeover of the functions of the marketplace. What the American public wants to buy, and at what price, would no longer be the guideline for American business. Instead, the manufacturer and the businessman would have to look first to Washington, rather than to the consumer.
