Obama campaign offers relief

The Obama campaign held a conference call advocating the creation of a National Catastrophic Insurance Fund. The call focused on describing Senator Obama’s support for such a fund, as well as the way Obama’s opponent for the presidency, Republican John McCain, has sided with current president George Bush in “letting the market work itself out” instead of helping people in need of governmental assistance.

Obama’s supporters described a system which the people in the states most in need of affordable disaster insurance could acquire it, with particular attention being paid to Florida (being that they are the most susceptible to being effected by a natural disaster). The call hosts noted that the money needed to lower insurance costs would come from private funding, and they mentioned that this would help make certain that states unwilling to pay for the insurance of people in other states would not have to do so.

Obama’s campaign painted the picture of McCain siding with insurance companies instead of helping out needy Americans. They said McCain initially supported such an insurance plan, but changed his mind after realizing President Bush opposed government intervention between citizens and insurance companies. Also, they said McCain’s belief that FEMA could help solve disaster relief problems was illogical.

Think tank experts argue economic implications of immigration

The Woodrow Wilson Center hosted a colloquium on “The Economic Effect of Immigration: Implications for Income and Employment of Low-Skill Labor in the United States.” Speakers at the colloquium included Tamar Jacoby, president and CEO of Immigration Works USA, and Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies.

Jacoby said the only cost of immigration is a one to four percent wage decrease for low-skilled American workers. She argued that this cost is negated by the economic growth caused by immigration. Jacoby offered the example that immigration in North Carolina bears a $61 million cost compared to $11 billion of economic growth. Jacoby contended that due to the way immigrant workers complement American workers, every one agricultural worker creates three local jobs.

Conversely, Krikorian said that mass immigration is not economically sustainable. Krikorian admitted that although immigration helps our economy grow, the growth may decrease quality of life and per capita income for Americans in general.

CATO experts forecast the future of an empowered China

Dr. Ted Galen Carpenter and Justin Logan, CATO Institute experts on U.S. / Chinese relations, today spoke at a briefing entitled “China’s Rise: Is Conflict Unavoidable?” The briefing examined the different political and economic ramifications a Chinese superpower would bring about across the world.

Carpenter, home after a recent trip to Beijing, said that the relationship our nation has with China is the most important foreign policy relationship we have. He stressed the difficult nature “reunifying” a politically divided China brought with it, and noted that bringing the Chinese together might not even come about should they continue to sustain their economic success.

Both Carpenter and Logan described the immense pressure the incoming U.S. President will have to both oppose the human rights violations the Chinese have demonstrated over recent years, and forge a healthy relationship with their nation for economic purposes and political stability. Dr. Carpenter worried that Republican presidential hopeful John McCain (R-Ariz) would cause animosity to arise between Washington lawmakers and the Chinese government.

Logan noted that natural disasters, massive pollution problems, and economic disparity have highlighted Chinese infrastructure problems. He said it is “not necessarily a good thing” that their country will owe ours money in the future, but that with good statesmanship a future U.S./Chinese relationship will not necessarily turn out to be entirely detrimental for our country or theirs.

The oil industry should be regulated more

The House Judiciary Committee met today to discuss ‘Retail Gas Prices’ and the effects it has on consumers. The Competition Policy and Antitrust Laws Task Force Subcommittee led the hearing, which discussed the future of diesel fuel and it’s effects on small businesses as well as consumers. Many of the witnesses suggested drilling for oil in ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and turning the oil market from an oligarchy to a competitive market.

We regulate onions more than we do oil, said Dr. Mark Cooper, director of research of the Consumer Federation of American today. The oil industry is not a competitive market and thus is under the jurisdiction of the antitrust task force. Cooper stressed the necessity to not ignore the traditional problem of the market structure. Since the market is working like a “cartel”, drilling in the United States whether in ANWR or creating more refineries will not influence the world price of oil. Cooper said it is necessary to change the market and make it more competitive, which will in turn lower gas prices.

Small business petrol and convenience stores are also suffering with the high costs of gasoline. Convenience stories earn profit not from gas, but from the food inside, however with gas prices so high, many consumers are driving farther to get cheaper gas. This is putting thousands of hard working American families at risk, said Bill Douglas, chief executive officer of Douglass distributing company.

David Owen, president of the National Association of small trucking companies, described the hardships smaller trucking companies are going through with the high diesel fuel costs. Small business truckers, which started more as grassroots organizations or family run businesses, cannot stop running or go on strike. If they do either of these things, then they will go out of business, Owen said.

Conference call discusses the economy and young Americans

A conference call featuring Tamara Draut, director of the Economic Opportunity Program at Demos and David Madland, director of the Center for American Progress today addressed “The Economic State of Young America.”

Draut and Madland discussed the many ways that the current state of the American economy effects young Americans. Draut noted that the job market now basically demands incoming workers attain college degrees, which proves to be costly for many unable to afford the substantial cost college tuition amounts to. Also, Draut said that because college loans are increasing and that those with lower incomes have to take out more money to go to school, many find themselves even further in debt upon graduation.

Madland discussed the “generational effect” (how different generations have different viewpoints) and how such viewpoints have led to younger people being more supportive of reforms such as universal healthcare.