The Wall Street Journal reports:

Corporate America never was among those chanting “four more years.”

For businesses, President Barack Obama’s victory means above all an end to hopes for what might have been—a more sympathetic ear in the White House, a lighter touch with regulation, business-friendly changes to the tax code, an attenuation of the health-care overhaul.

Instead, CEOs are simultaneously hoping for a softening of the perceived standoff that characterized the president’s first term in office while bracing for more of the same.

The energy sector, for example, worries Mr. Obama will feel obliged to reward crucial support from environmentalists by continuing to crack down on energy exploration and drilling practices that have been criticized. The telecom sector is shelving plans for big acquisitions that might have been more feasible under a Mitt Romney administration. And companies are preparing for provisions of the health-care overhaul that will soon come into effect.

On top of all that are wild cards like the debate over the half a trillion dollars in spending cuts and tax increases known as the fiscal cliff, and potentially expensive policy issues like climate change. Concerns about such issues were front and center in the stock market on Wednesday, when the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed about 275 points.

Great start to that second term, Obama voters: A 313-point drop in the stock market. Worst stock day of the year. Money votes too.

Add to that this: “House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) on Wednesday said he is ready to negotiate a budget deal with President Barack Obama to avoid the so-called fiscal cliff that includes new tax revenues, as long as Democrats agree to cuts and changes to federal entitlement programs.”

So the House GOP is surrendering already. Any reader who believes Democrats will not raise taxes on the “middle class” as part of a “so-called fiscal cliff” deal is deluding yourself. (Of course, I would favor a tax increase on Democrats at a level high enough to make them suffer. I am unwilling to waste more of my tax dollars on government than I already do.)

The Washington Post reports that (senile) Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid “said he spoke to Boehner and that they agreed not to “draw lines in the sand” on taxes.” Which is Washingtonspeak for “we’re raising your taxes, ha ha ha!”

Of course, business knows that taxes aren’t the only tax on business, as the U.S. Small Business Administration even admits (via the Western Center for Journalism):

A study done by the Small Business Administration (SBA) said that in 2010, the annual cost of Federal regulations was $1.75 trillion. Our national debt is over $15 trillion, which amounts to about 11.5% of GDP. That’s a lot of money. Think of the impact on our struggling economy if we were able to cut those costs in half.

Why do regulations have a cost?

When government creates a rule (regulation), they often have to hire more public sector workers to enforce it. This expands government and pulls more people out of the private sector where goods and services are produced.

The other major cost is that businesses are forced to comply in order to avoid breaking the law. Often, the new rule means a business has to hire new staff members to make sure the business is following the rules. The business has to redirect money it was planning to spend on creating goods and services for its customers towards people who make sure they follow rules. …

Think of it. Who is in a better position to absorb the cost of massive regulation—large business or small business? Of course, the answer is large business because they have more money, scale, and staff to deal with these issues.

So what ends up happening?

The regulatory cost acts as a barrier on small business. As a result, small businesses suffer and aren’t as competitive as large businesses. In many cases, the small business either goes out of business, goes bankrupt, or the large business acquires the struggling small business. Therefore, increased regulations guarantee more large business! …

Small business makes up 99.7% of all employer firms and creates more than half of GDP growth. When government over-regulates, American small business suffers. Because small business is the backbone of this country, when American small business suffers, our whole economy suffers.

Business has every reason to be upset and angry with the election results. Business’ employees will feel the brunt when the economy slides back into recession and today’s unemployment/underemployment rate looks like good times. (Which is already starting.) One would think that business is the solution to improving the unemployment/underemployment rate, but the Democratic Party thinks otherwise.

A friend reminded me of Ronald Reagan’s observation that there are no smart people in politics because smart people are in business because the money’s better. To paraphrase William F. Buckley Jr., I’d rather be governed by the membership of any chamber of commerce than the members of any legislative body. Business people have to earn their money.