The Argus II Retinal Prosthesis System is aimed at bringing sight to those who are otherwise severely visually impaired. The bionic eye s made up of 60 electrodes implanted in the retina and combine with a pair of glasses that contain a mini camera.
Missing Workers video by let freedom ring usa
Recent statistics make it crystal clear why growing private sector jobs and opportunity must be at the top of my priority list in Washington.
At 10.9 percent, California was second in the nation for unemployment in January 2012. Add in the underemployed and those who have stopped looking for a job, and the figure spikes to an abysmal 20 percent.
National figures are still poor, as well. In February, the official unemployment rate stood at 8.3 percent–14.9 percent with discouraged job seekers and the underemployed figured in.
Growing jobs involves creating an environment in which opportunity can thrive. Such an environment has several components, all of which must be addressed.
BOLD SOLUTION A: Strip away Overregulation of Business and Industry
The financial costs of regulatory compliance currently stymie both the establishment of new businesses and the expansion of existing ones.
Small business has created approximately two-thirds of all U.S. jobs in the past 15 years. However, in a February Gallup poll, 46 percent of small businesses surveyed cited concerns about new government regulations among the reasons they are not presently hiring. In addition, overregulation has contributed to an exodus of large businesses and industries from American shores. When those companies leave, American jobs go with them.
Our Founders wisely established limits on government, knowing that too much of it would hinder freedom–including the freedom to start a business, grow it, and create good jobs. Peeling back layers of burdensome and unnecessary federal regulation will help to release government’s current chokehold on job creators, stimulating real opportunity in the form of solid, private sector jobs.
BOLD SOLUTION B: Reform the Federal Tax Code and Corporate Tax Rates
Simplifying our labyrinthine tax code and structure would greatly benefit the job market in California and the U.S. In addition, we must lower corporate tax rates. In fact, the U.S. currently has the second highest corporate tax code among all developed countries. Making these crucial changes would help to stop the flight of American business overseas and the loss private sector jobs.
Visit my page on Tax Policy to learn more about the 9-9-9 tax reform plan I support.
BOLD SOLUTION C: Debt Reduction
If any business conducted its finances the way our federal government does it would collapse. Yet government spending continues, and with it the demand that business prop up this crazy spending and debt with ever more taxes and fees.
This cycle traps businesses, forcing them to walk an increasingly fine line between keeping production and service levels high enough to meet demand while maintaining affordable consumer prices. As the balancing act becomes more difficult, jobs are inevitably sacrificed. Addressing the national debt in a serious way will relieve this negative trend.
Visit my Bold Solutions page on the Economy to learn more.
BOLD SOLUTION D: Revamp Energy Policy
Backwards U.S. Energy policy is currently driving up the price of nearly everything…and costing jobs. The more expensive it becomes for business and industry to operate, the more our job market will suffer.
Moving energy policy in a better direction would not only lower costs; it would also create valuable private sector jobs in the energy production field
Visit my Bold Solutions page on Energy policy to learn more.
BOLD SOLUTION E: Reform Patent Law and the FDA Approval Process
PATENT LAW REFORM
Depending on licensing arrangements, an invention can actually generate jobs through multiple producers. Unfortunately, inventors and the companies that produce inventions often struggle under current patent law. Legal claims against a new invention–or fear of potential claims–often tie up tremendous time and resources that would otherwise facilitate a speedier path to production and job creation.
An Independent Inventor Defense–such as that proposed by Stephen Kinsella or Alexander Tabarrok–may be one helpful means of ensuring that more resources are invested in producing solid inventions and creating real jobs than on paying patent lawyers.
FDA APPROVAL REFORM
Reforming an overly bureaucratic FDA approval process would similarly benefit job creation.
We all want to know the products used to treat us are safe. However, copious research now reveals that the FDA has become more costly and obstructionist than valuable and effective in the approval of new drugs and medical devices. Valuable time and resources are being wastefully absorbed in political complexities and bureaucratic delays . With responsible FDA reform, these resources could be better directed into actual product manufacture and job growth.
Economists Daniel Klein and Alexander Tabarrok–both fellows of the Independent Institute and faculty members at George Mason University–have proposed a number of highly informed FDA reforms. These reforms would potentially eliminate much or all of the red tape that currently delays effective treatment for people in need, as well as provide a means for the FDA to restore its rather compromised credibility. The reforms would have the additional benefit of yielding good jobs faster.
Farmers in the US may soon be prevented from dosing healthy livestock with antibiotics that encourage faster growth. Pressure to ban the practice has fallen on the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) following a court ruling and the publication of research showing how a strain of bacteria jumped from humans to farmyard animals and back again, picking up antibiotic resistance on the way.
The court ruling, won by the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York, commits the FDA to reconsider a ban first proposed in 1977 on the non-therapeutic farmyard use of penicillin and two other types of antibiotics called tetracyclines in animal feed. More
It would be nice if politicians and regulators left us alone. But they don’t. They always want to do more. Recently, there have been shortages of some medicines. Cancer patients can’t get drugs they need. Why not?
One reason is that a big drugmaker shut down for a year in part to meet Food and Drug Administration rules. The FDA makes it so expensive and difficult to sell drugs that there isn’t an eager pack of companies rushing to the fill the gap. The free market would provide that, but government intervention, such as low Medicare reimbursement, strangles it. So people suffer.
Does the FDA say it’s sorry for its part and back off? Of course not. Regulators almost never do that. In fact, the FDA wants more power.
It wants to regulate how your doctor uses his smartphone. I’m not kidding! The FDA wants the power to approve mobile medical apps that let doctors monitor patients’ vital signs over their phones. As one doctor put it, “Even though I’m away from the hospital, I can still look at … real-time wave form data just as if I were at the patient’s bedside.”
Sounds great. It makes doctors more efficient. But the FDA basically says, “No, you just can’t put something on your phone if it’s a medical device. What if it doesn’t work right? We have to approve it first.”
That caution makes sense to people. Our first instinct is to say, “I don’t want someone getting rich off a device that might not work right. It might kill me. I want the FDA to make sure everything is safe and effective.”
But lawyer Jonathan Emord says our instinct is wrong.
“It is wrong because these regulations are costly, burdensome, and they prevent essential medical apps from getting into the marketplace,” Emord said. More
Avastin is a cancer drug developed by Roche Holding AG. It is also a costly drug. Avastin is used successfully for certain types of cancer (colorectal, lung, kidney, brain, and breast). It’s that last one that is raising eyebrows.
Obamacare created a new Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB) to ‘curtail spending’. Now, on advice from the IMAB, the FDA is considering restricting Avastin. It is amazing to see the range of responses from the left here in America.
Try searching your favorite internet search engine for Avastin. The Avastin debate has been painted as everything from “right-wing-nut-job death panel talk” to “the drug doesn’t work for breast cancer” to “we already ration healthcare, so get over it.” I’m glad some on the left are admitting the truth. It’s a little scary that they still think it is the way we should handle our healthcare. This will be an interesting debate to watch once the November elections are over (maybe it is just a weird coincidence that the FDA kicked the can down the road until then).