I think I remember a similar position in Atlas Shrugged. They didn't call it SoB though. Will have to research.
If he gets another term, President Obama has a new plan about how to get businesses hiring again. He wants to appoint a Secretary of Business. Yes, that means creating another government position which will naturally lead to more paper work, more bureaucracy and more chaos for the country's job creators.
In an interview with MSNBC, the president said he wants to consolidate a number of business and trade-related agencies, creating a "one-stop shop" for oversight.
"I’ve said that I want to consolidate a whole bunch of government agencies. We should have one secretary of Business, instead of nine different departments that are dealing with things like giving loans to SBA [the Small Business Administration] or helping companies with exports," he said in an interview with MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough.
Under the president's original proposal, six different commerce and trade agencies, including the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Export-Import Bank, would be brought under one roof.
The president also said the SBA should be elevated to a Cabinet-level position.
Lets get real. We all know with President Obama's history of expanding government and appointing dozens of czars, he has no interest to actually create a "one-stop shop" for business oversight. Not to mention, giving business another governmental oversight figure will only cause more problems and continue to slow job growth. The government doesn't create jobs, small businesses do and they don't need a "Secretary of Business" telling them how to do it, either. Not to mention, President Obama has a contemptuous relationship with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. If he was really trying to help businesses, he would listen to more of the Chamber's suggestions.
It would save a ton of reading time if you just said that you didn't like Obama. To cite an interview where he said he wanted to shrink the government, and then say because you believe he hates businesses that he won't actually shrink the government is wasting my time. That and if the government doesn't create jobs, doesn't that mean then that any argument that Obama is responsible for not enough job growth or that Romney will create more job growth is purely contradictory pandering political drivel?
I'm not sure where you read about Obama making cuts or shrinking the government. Consolidate can, but does not always mean to cut any excess.
"Under the president's original proposal, six different commerce and trade agencies, including the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Export-Import Bank, would be brought under one roof."
He just want them all together under one cabinet level position. Obama has never shown any inclination to shrink any from of government and to think he would in this instance is laughable. Obama wanting more control over a larger government does fall in line with his past actions.
So you agree with me?
In part - but I also don't. He has neither vastly expanded government, nor drastically cut it. I don't see him as some great evil trying to wrest control over all aspects of government - but very much in line with the past 4 presidents. Some reductions, some expansions.
Obama did two things to greatly increase the power of Government.
Probably the most nefarious, most Darth Vader like, was signing the NDAA into law in the middle of the night on a holiday. It basically gave the Government the power to say the hell with the constitution and incarcerate American citizens without due process of law for an indefinite period of time. Basically, so long as the Government, by their own standards, can label you a terrorist, they can snatch you up, throw you under the prison and forget you.
The second is the healthcare bill, which among other things, makes your health, and therefore how you choose to live your life, the Governments' business.
I agree about the NDAA actually. He deserves criticism for that - and so does the senate, which voted 98-1 for the version he signed (his signing statement about his reservations is weak - if he really didn't like those provisions, I think he could have pushed harder against them). I am hopeful that it will come under judicial review.
I disagree regarding your interpretation of the Healthcare bill - but that should be no surprise.
Isn't promoting and supporting business the job of the Secretary of Commerce?
This proposal, if serious, seems to fall into the "I don't know what else to do, so let's reorganize the bureaucracy." category.
I've been through several departmental reorganizations. The real trick is not so much moving Agency A from Department B to Department C, but in defining what actually will enhance the efficiency of providing services to the customer.
At a more local level -- my college -- I see that if you don't want anything done, you set up a task force for it! At least that's how it works out.
At the federal level, I think that's optimistic. Yet another bureaucracy means even more restrictions on those that want to do something productive. Surely if the President wants to hobble the economy, he's got more than enough tools to do it with as it is. If he doesn't, he can deregulate without another regulatory agency.
Dredging back into the depths of memory, I seem to recall reorganizing and consolidating federal agencies to yield operational efficiencies and improve responsiveness to the public was assigned to Al Gore, back in the Clinton administration.
Yea, I saw that earlier.
Truly, one of the most perfect slam-my-head-into-the-desk moments in a regime characterized by dazzeling ineptitude, bewildering incompetence, dipshitness and asshatification.