Beer Taxes, the Beige Book and Drug Safety Before the Supreme Court
1. TAXES
Oregon
becomes one of the states seeking to raise new revenue by increasing
taxes on beer.
CEI Expert Available to Comment: Policy Analyst Michelle Minton on the impact
of hiking
beer taxes:
“…[beer and wine] tax increases will hurt employees and pubs
hardest. To back that up we can take the UK as an example—they are seeing the roosting
chickens from Chancellor Darling’s 2008 beer tax in the form of 20,000 lost
jobs and 2000 pubs closing. That’s just in 2008. American lawmakers should
think very carefully before following the same principal as the Brits who,
let’s face it, have a much stronger relationship with their pubs. As a result
of taxing this industry, England
is loosing its small pubs, many family-owned and many that have been part of
communities for decades.”
2. BUSINESS
The Federal Reserve releases its “Beige Book”, an overview
of economic conditions in each of the Bank’s 12 regions.
CEI Expert Available
to Comment: Adjunct Fellow Fran
Smith on what the Fed has to say about current
state of the economy:
“[Yesterday] afternoon the Federal Reserve released its
summary of economic conditions in the 12 Federal Reserve Districts. Based on
anecdotal information, reports, and interviews with key sources, the report is
issued eight times per year. The key adjectives used to describe recent
economic conditions in those districts were ‘bleak,’ ‘stagnant,’ ‘dismal,’
‘sluggish,’ ‘slow,’ ‘dropping,’ ‘falling’ and other descriptors for a sharp
decline in economic activity across almost all areas and sectors of the
economy. One exception was the manufacture of pharmaceuticals and biotechnology
products, where there was continued demand. Also, basic food production was
stable…Guess it’s encouraging the Fed didn’t change the name to the ‘Black
Book.’
3. LEGAL
The Supreme Court rules
against drug maker Wyeth in a dispute over government guidelines for health
safety warnings.
CEI Expert Available to Comment: Senior Fellow Gregory Conko on why the
decision was bad
policy and bad law:
“…the Supreme Court could have and
should have held in Wyeth’s favor with a narrowly tailored opinion confined to
the facts of this case. Doing so would not have insulated wrong-doers from
punishment, but would have recognized that Congress gave FDA statutory
authority over questions of safety and efficacy because it believed that only a
federal expert body could effectively balance the benefits and risks of new
medicines. As Justice Alito’s dissent makes clear, ‘the ordinary principles of
conflict pre-emption turn solely on whether a State has upset the regulatory
balance struck by the federal agency.’ That is exactly what has happened here.
So, not only is the majority’s decision bad policy, it’s also bad law.”
Listen to LibertyWeek,
the CEI weekly podcast, here.