Manufacturer & Business Association

Federal Legislation

Federal Legislation to be Designated as Key Vote

The Manufacturer & Business Association (MBA) advises that the following legislation, including potential procedural votes, be considered for designation as “Key Vote” in the 111th Congress:

MBA Key Vote – Senate Health-Care Legislation

The rising cost of health care, paired with fewer choices and less secure coverage leaves little doubt that the current health-care system needs reformed. It is unacceptable that individuals and families are being forced to pay more while being offered fewer choices. The MBA, however, opposes the provisions of ALL health-care bills currently being considered in Congress.

A one-size-fits-all legislative approach to health-care reform will destroy the private health-care system in the United States, directly interfere in the personal health-care decisions of many Americans by forcing them into government-controlled plans, and create a health-care system that will eventually cost more, provide less and decrease the quality of care. The MBA stands by the fact that health reform should revive, not weaken, private health insurance; however, we cannot support reform just for the sake of reform.

The MBA advises that Senate votes on the following bills – HR 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act; HR 3200, the Affordable Health Choices Act; and HR 3590, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; or any similar legislation, including potential procedural votes, will be considered for designation as a Key Vote in the 111th Congress.

MBA Key Vote on HR 4154, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009

Curbing productivity and growth, the estate or death tax ultimately hurts small- and medium-sized manufacturers and businesses by discouraging savings and investments while reducing wages and job creation. Without congressional action, the current death tax rate of $3.5 million at 45 percent will be repealed for a year in 2010, and then reset to affect all estates over $1 million at 55 percent in 2011, forcing some families to sell a business when the owner dies.

Making the death tax permanent at the 2009 rate does little to offer significant tax reform to the thousands of businesses it affects each year. The Association strongly rejects this legislation and instead encourages real tax reform that assists American families and businesses.

MBA Key Vote on HR 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act

 The rising cost of health care, paired with fewer choices and less secure coverage leaves little doubt that the current health-care system needs reformed. It is unacceptable that individuals and families are being forced to pay more while being offered fewer choices. The MBA, however, specifically opposes the following provisions of HR 3962:
  • Massive tax on working capital. The 4.5 million American sub S-Corporations, thousands of whom are located in Pennsylvania, would be forced to face a 5.4-percent surtax on incomes over $500,000, equating to a federal tax rate of nearly 50 percent;
  • Heavy regulation of health insurance through mandatory coverage by employers, a government-run health-care program (public option), the creation of a Health Insurance Exchange, and the slashing of Medicare payments to providers by more than $400 billion;
  • Reduced individual control over health-care decisions; and
  • Unsustainable federal spending, which will ultimately ration care and services.

This one-size-fits-all legislative approach to health-care reform will destroy the private health-care system in the United States, directly interfere in the personal health-care decisions of many Americans by forcing them into government-controlled plans, and create a health-care system that will eventually cost more, provide less and decrease the quality of care. The MBA stands by the fact that health reform should revive, not weaken, private health insurance; however, we cannot support reform just for the sake of reform.

MBA Key Vote on HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act

Serving as another tax on Americans, a mandate such as cap and trade would disastrously attempt to reduce fossil fuel use, while putting the United States at a serious economic disadvantage without any justifiable environmental benefits. The MBA opposes provisions in the legislation that would:

  • Attempt to Regulate a Naturally Occurring Gas – Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a widespread byproduct of fossil fuel combustion – including coal, oil and natural gas, which provide 85 percent of America’s energy.
  • Impose Government Rations on Energy – By interfering with market forces, cap and trade would drive up the cost of fossil fuels, creating an unmatched level of government intervention in the economy and energy sector.
  • U.S. Cap and Trade Would Have Minimal Impact on Global Temperature – EPA analysis demonstrates that a 60 percent reduction in CO2 emissions by the United States by 2050 would reduce global temperature by merely 0.1 to 0.2 degrees centigrade by 2095.
  • Increase Pennsylvania’s Energy Rates – By 2030, the cost of coal, oil and natural gas would increase gasoline prices in Pennsylvania between 74 percent and 143 percent, electricity prices from 78 percent to 113 percent, and natural gas from 93 to 133 percent.
  • Cap and Trade Would Cost the U.S. Millions of Jobs – Negatively impacting all major economic sectors, job loss would be primarily due to lower industrial output, higher energy costs, the high price of compliance, and greater competition from overseas manufacturers with lower energy costs.

MBA Key Vote on HR 1409, the Employee Free Choice Act

The MBA believes that all workers deserve the fundamental right to a federally supervised private-ballot election when deciding to unionize. This legislation, however, would fail to guarantee that all workers have a voice in the unionization process. Forcing employees to sign cards indicating support of a union in front of union organizers, co-workers and their employer, employees would be subjected to intimidation or retaliation. Once a majority of workers signed authorization cards, the other employees would be forced to accept the decision — having been left out of the process completely.

The MBA specifically opposes provisions in HR 1409 that would:

  • Undermine worker rights by taking away their right to vote by secret ballot, as well as force employees into unions without the ability to vote on employment contracts.
  • Create an artificial timetable that would require binding arbitration if a union contract could not be reached within 120 days of unionization.
  • Increases penalties on employers — not unions — for unfair labor practices committed during an organizing drive.

MBA Key Vote on H.R. 11, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

The MBA is strongly committed to equal employment opportunity and supports fervent enforcement of anti-discrimination laws. This legislation, however, goes far beyond the issues raised in the Supreme Court’s decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., leading to less timely identification and resolution of possible discrimination claims, as well as an increase in frivolous lawsuits.

The MBA opposes provisions in H.R. 11 that would:

  • Eliminate current time limits for filing almost all discrimination charges;
  • Expose employers to the possibility of having to defend themselves against decade-old claims;
  • Discourage prompt filing of claims that allow employers to identify and, if necessary, discipline those who may be violating the law; and,
  • Create a new cause of action for family members or others “affected by” the alleged discrimination.

MBA Key Vote on H.R. 12, the Paycheck Fairness Act

The MBA is strongly committed to equal employment opportunity, while also preventing and mitigating workplace discrimination. This legislation, however, does not support these goals.

The Equal Pay Act (EPA), which is current law, already prohibits wage discrepancies based on gender in the same establishment. The MBA opposes provisions in H.R. 12 that would:

  • Eliminate current caps on punitive and compensatory damages in claims made under the EPA;
  • Expose employers to unlimited punitive and compensatory damage awards when unintentional pay disparities have occurred;
  • Change procedural requirements for bring class action suits under the EPA, significantly increasing the number of plaintiffs in class actions; and,
  • Force employers to purchase additional legal liability insurance to protect themselves, leading to an increased cost of doing business in the United States and ultimately lower wages and job loss to offset the expense.