We know how the Republicans are always going on about the need for rich people to have 'certainty' in order to make any business or market related moves, as if business should be a totally risk-free proposition. When in fact, they use this phrase as code for getting rid of profit-diminishing regulations or taxes.
Now a Romney campaign surrogate who appeared on the PBS Newshour has taken this argument to new heights of absurdity. The poor oppressed job creators now face 'uncertainty' when they don't have 100% of the power in the labor-management relationship. And they can't sleep at night, worrying about all the alarming things the Obama administration might do to their certainty.
In the interview, Romney's policy director was asked how Gov. Romney would get companies and individuals to hire more people, and the uncertainty hobgoblin appeared front and center.
LANHEE CHEN: Well, it starts with policies oriented toward economic growth, policies that would remove a lot of the policy uncertainty that there is right now.
Honestly, Ray, the problem is a lot of job creators don't know ... what the policy environment is going to look like. And this president hasn't given them the certainty they need to create jobs and to grow their businesses.
There are a number of different changes that can restore certainty and get entrepreneurs and job creators going again. Unfortunately, this president has done none of those things.
And here's a new tidbit he casually drops into the mix that sheds some light on Romney's (mostly hidden) agenda and policies, another element to help chase away the uncertainty:
So it starts with things like ... returning some balance to the relationship between labor and management.
Uh huh. 'Job creators' need to be 'certain' that they can exploit their workers and that the worker has no bargaining power or leverage, at all. Because it's not about 'uncertainty' at all, it's about doing away with any so-called balance of power and shifting it all to one side.
He was asked whether there aren't external forces beyond a president's control. He replied that the Obama administration has been focusing on all the wrong things, such as Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, the NLRB 'crackdown' on Boeing, and...
They focused on cap and trade.
Yes, cap and trade. Which host Ray Suarez pointed out has been a dead topic for several years at least.
RAY SUAREZ: And has anyone in the Obama administration said the words cap and trade in years? You cite that as something that's creating uncertainty. It hasn't been mentioned that I have seen in the news any time recently.
LANHEE CHEN: Well, Ray, the fact that it hasn't been mentioned as a specific piece of legislation doesn't mean, first of all, the administration hasn't pursued it administratively through the EPA.
Sure, it doesn't mean the Obama administration hasn't pursued it administratively. It also doesn't mean it has. The last mention of cap and trade in a Google search was from August '11, and that was in The Washington Times. But you know, according to Romneylogic, just because they haven't mentioned it at all in years doesn't mean that it isn't still just as scary. The very possibility of its being mentioned is enough to precipitate tremors of fear in job creators.
And, second of all, the specter that the administration could pursue cap and trade legislation, as they attempted to do during the first two years of the president's term, creates the kind of uncertainty that job creators don't need.
The specter of possible cap and trade discussions: