Thursday, January 27, 2005
industries use the back door
During the past four years, the Bu$h administration has steadily been using the system of regulatory change to affect everything from truckers' hours to environmental policy.
This means that instead of trying to change laws, and having to go through public scrutiny as proposed changes get debated in the House or Senate, government agencies proposes changes to the Federal Register and usually gets changes through much more quietly.
While changes to the Register usually require a public comment period, it's not the kind of stuff that usually makes the news until after the changes have been made. In fact, you'd probably only know if a change was proposed if you were paying attention either to the Register itself (which is huge and not very fun reading), or if you were signed up with some sort of group that pays attention to proposed changes.
Now, if you're still reading this post, you're probably saying, this is all very fascinating (yawn) but why should I care?
A new report (via the Washington Post, reg. req.) shows that many industry groups have been lobbying the US government to make some very interesting regulatory changes over the next few years.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but many government rules have developed out of a desire on the part of the public for protections from industries whose main interest is their own bottom line, not necessarily worker safety or environmental protection. The above companies and lobbying groups (and there are many more like them) are trying to change both the regulatory process and the regulations in order to make them more favorable to industry desires.
This means that what is good for you or I or the environment will probably get less consideration than what is good financially for industry when it comes to making regulatory changes.
Businesses use some of the money they earn from selling products to us to lobby for regulatory changes. On the other hand, the folks who lobby for our protections (such as the PIRG groups) usually rely on donations in order to do their work.
So, the more we support businesses (such as Deere and Co.), the more money they have to help make rules that will make them more money, and possibly injure us or our quality of life. Sounds fair, right?
The Bu$h administration will say that the regulatory changes are done in the name of streamlining the government and improving health and safety for citizens. However, this is the same administration that changed the rules to allow truckers to drive for more hours at a time.
Regulatory changes affect our quality of life and our health and happiness. That's why we should care that big business is attempting to change the rules in their favor.
¶ 9:38 AM
During the past four years, the Bu$h administration has steadily been using the system of regulatory change to affect everything from truckers' hours to environmental policy.
This means that instead of trying to change laws, and having to go through public scrutiny as proposed changes get debated in the House or Senate, government agencies proposes changes to the Federal Register and usually gets changes through much more quietly.
While changes to the Register usually require a public comment period, it's not the kind of stuff that usually makes the news until after the changes have been made. In fact, you'd probably only know if a change was proposed if you were paying attention either to the Register itself (which is huge and not very fun reading), or if you were signed up with some sort of group that pays attention to proposed changes.
Now, if you're still reading this post, you're probably saying, this is all very fascinating (yawn) but why should I care?
A new report (via the Washington Post, reg. req.) shows that many industry groups have been lobbying the US government to make some very interesting regulatory changes over the next few years.
On the latest wish list, for example, Deere & Co. asked that all government regulatory activities be privatized, including the development and enforcement of rules. It also wants the Environmental Protection Agency to involve business and industry coalitions in its rulemakings. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers wants the EPA to rethink its "unrealistic goal" of cleaning up all groundwater. The American Furniture Manufacturers Association asked for changes to the Family and Medical Leave Act rules. NAM said that the Interior Department should tighten its procedures for listing endangered species because they are inhibiting its ability to conduct business.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but many government rules have developed out of a desire on the part of the public for protections from industries whose main interest is their own bottom line, not necessarily worker safety or environmental protection. The above companies and lobbying groups (and there are many more like them) are trying to change both the regulatory process and the regulations in order to make them more favorable to industry desires.
This means that what is good for you or I or the environment will probably get less consideration than what is good financially for industry when it comes to making regulatory changes.
Businesses use some of the money they earn from selling products to us to lobby for regulatory changes. On the other hand, the folks who lobby for our protections (such as the PIRG groups) usually rely on donations in order to do their work.
So, the more we support businesses (such as Deere and Co.), the more money they have to help make rules that will make them more money, and possibly injure us or our quality of life. Sounds fair, right?
The Bu$h administration will say that the regulatory changes are done in the name of streamlining the government and improving health and safety for citizens. However, this is the same administration that changed the rules to allow truckers to drive for more hours at a time.
Regulatory changes affect our quality of life and our health and happiness. That's why we should care that big business is attempting to change the rules in their favor.
¶ 9:38 AM
Comments:
<< Home
dammit....does this mean I shouldn't be buying that new John Deere tractor?
blahguy
Post a Comment
blahguy
# posted by 
: 4:42 PM
: 4:42 PM<< Home
