One of the talking points for Republican Presidential candidates this election cycle is their opposition to federal government regulations. And the GOP, as a party, has worked nationwide to effect deregulation at the state level.
The anti-regulation stance makes for good sound bites and applause, and is a popular position to take; but the fact of the matter is that most government regulations are vitally necessary. There is good reason for them, and two news stories the last few days bear this out.
The cruise ship disaster in the Mediterranean is said to be due to human error, and a lack of proper crew training--bringing into question cruise ship regulation, or lack of regulation. Strictly enforced, well-developed regulations may well have prevented a tragedy.
The apple juice story reveals a danger to American consumers that is due to a lack of regulation.
More than 70 percent of the apple juice consumed in this country comes from China, where arsenic based pesticides are used in farming. Unacceptable levels of arsenic are being found in that apple juice.
The need is obvious for regulations stringent enough to protect consumers. But at present, the Food and Drug Administration inspects only two percent of the food imported into the United States.
When the case is made for deregulation, consider the possible cost.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think you need to take a targeted approach to the overabundance of regulations that stifle the smooth functioning of the economy. The Republicans have a point, but the same point can also be made by the Democrats. Increased efficiencies in the operations of government and the implementation of laws is something that both parties should be eager to pursue.
ReplyDelete