Case Challenging Sarbanes-Oxley Heads to Supreme Court Posted by Matt Hawes

Posted 05/29/09

The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and the Free Enterprise Fund have challenged the constitutionality of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), created by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Last week, the Surpreme Court agreed to hear the case.

According to Christine Hall at CEI:

The Appointments Clause of the Constitution requires that "officers of the United States" be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. But the officers serving on the PCAOB, with tremendous power to impose criminal and civil penalties on people and companies accused of violating accounting regulations, were not appointed that way.

"The Founding Fathers wanted powerful government officials to be vetted by the President and the Senate, to help ensure agencies remain accountable to elected officials and ultimately the American people," said Sam Kazman, CEI General Counsel....

"The PCAOB has been very bad for the economy," said Hans Bader, a CEI attorney. "The biggest beneficiaries of the law have been the big accounting firms that failed to warn the public about Enron and similar scandals, which are charging record fees to help businesses comply with the mountain of red tape created by the PCAOB."

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, giving it authority to set accounting standards, impose its own set of taxes, and open investigations of accounting firms big and small. Yet unlike counterparts wielding similar authority, such as the IRS commissioner and Federal Reserve governors, PCAOB members are never vetted by the President or by the Senate, as neither of these bodies have a say in who will be appointed.

The PCAOB's interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley's section 404 has cost public companies more than $35 billion a year, has proved especially burdensome to smaller public companies, and has cost the economy as a whole over a trillion dollars, according to a Brookings-AEI study....

Read the rest.

In the following video, John Berlau, Director of the Center for Investors & Entrepreneurs, explains Sarbanes-Oxley and discusses its horrible effect on businesses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnwI2YBM4To

Letter to the Editor, Hutchinson Leader: Nation's out-of-control spending has to stop Posted by awoodwor

Posted 05/29/09

From Archie Woodworth
Hutchinson
OK. I know I’m not the brightest bulb in the crayon box, so can someone help me out here?

Where’s the change? President Obama campaigned on the promises of “hope and change.” I’m starting to think those slogans went out the door just like Bush 41’s no-new-taxes promise.

I’m trying to keep an open mind, but so far all I’m seeing is an administration made up of the same old Washington insiders, Clinton era retreads and now, as we’re finding out, tax cheats who get special treatment from the IRS with no penalties or interest. So tell me if the “best and brightest” of Washington can’t even figure out how to pay their taxes, how are we mere mortals supposed to get it right?

And what about the “new deal”? To me it’s looking more and more like a “raw deal” (at least for those of us who actually pay taxes) and nothing more than a continuation of the Bush administration’s out of control spending and failed economic policies. Honestly, does any one other than the people in Washington really believe the fairy tale that we can actually spend our way both into oblivion and out of an economic crisis at the same time?

I don’t know what kind of Kool-Aid they’re on, but I’d sure like some. Because unlike our exalted leaders, I honestly don’t believe the economy, the country, or even “We the People,” will be able to withstand another four years of trazillion dollar deficit spending. I say trazillion because I can’t even begin to comprehend how much a trillion dollars actually is, not even after I Googled it. Yet our politicians throw that number around like it was toilet paper.

Yup, I can’t believe I’d ever hear myself say this, but I’m actually starting to look back fondly upon the Clinton era as the good old days. You know, the last great golden age of fiscal responsibility. Does anyone in Washington even know what that means anymore?

While former President Clinton may have had problems with his personal life, at least he managed to reign in government spending and he did a pretty good job of staying out of the way of the economy. Well, OK, maybe his reign wasn’t all that great, but compared to the out-of-control spending we’ve seen since then with the Bush and Obama administrations, maybe it actually was.

The 5 Political Systems Posted by Jim Bobier

Posted 03/04/09 Last updated 03/04/09

A conservative delegate from Pelican Lakes introduced me to this great 10-minute video about the 5 basic forms of government. I found this very enlightening and I hope you appreciate this explaination as much as I did.

My son's Scoutmaster really appreciated this so much that he is now incorporating this into his instructions for the Citizenship in the Nation merit badge.

Jim

http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment

Idealism: Freedom From Slavery Posted by lexslexus

Posted 12/22/08 Last updated 07/08/09

On November 4th, a vast majority of Americans will choose to cast their ballots for, or approve by non-participation, some slight variance of more of the same.  Many have been whipped into a lather of hatred for the other party and soak up the promises of more government intervention resulting in even less personal liberty to make choices and take risks.

Are we so immoral to believe that it is acceptable for government to increasingly take from others what we are not willing to earn ourselves?  Have we become comfortable groveling at the feet of the ruling class for our next stimulus check, siphoned directly out of our neighbor’s wallet?  Do we understand that wealth, like freedom, is neither created nor destroyed by man – it is simply transferred?

Our current mess is not for lack of a better way, but in spite of one that already exists. It involves a return to personal responsibility.  It involves a return to respect & adherence to Constitutional government which protects the freedom of our families from those in government who have found it in their own best interest to transfer that freedom to another family they prefer.

On November 4th and beyond I support a revolution devoted to a return to Constitutional values.  Among those at the forefront of that cause are Ron Paul, and the candidate he has endorsed for President, Chuck Baldwin.  I may be considered idealistic and I’m O.K. with that.  Unless we support our ideals, we’re simply slaves to those who have acquired the freedom to impose their own.