This story is archived
Strengthening of Consumer Agency Opposed by Its Boss »
Posted by: Beau7890 2 years, 2 months agoThe top official for consumer product safety has asked Congress in recent days to reject legislation that would strengthen the agency that polices thousands of consumer goods, from toys to tools.
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
Submitted By:
Beau7890
A chicken walks into a bar holding a violin case. He’s wearing a chrysanthemum in his lapel. He sits down at the mahogany bar ...
Who Also Submitted:
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 86
-
Beau7890
Oct. 29, 2007, 10:35 p.m.This is outrageous.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission is charged with protecting the safety of consumers, not with protecting business interests. Ms. Nord is NOT the head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, nor is she the Secretary of Commerce.
Consumer advocates should demand she be replaced immediately.
-
sumptuousdigs
Oct. 29, 2007, 11:23 p.m.No surprise here either. The administration is rife with appointees who are determined to dismantle not only government services and bust unions, break treaties, and destroy, civil liberties, they are out to scuttle the government itself. Corporatism is the agenda here. Once the government is useless and bankrupt, GE GM GD Raytheon and a list of others will step in and 'rescue the country'.
-
stephen-johnson
Oct. 29, 2007, 11:30 p.m.I read the article, and it presents the issue as an open and shut case. That makes me suspicious.
I'll vote for the story now, and conduct my own inquiry on the matter tomorrow, time permitting. Thanks for the link.
-
Amazing1
Oct. 29, 2007, 11:30 p.m.But I'm sure you've heard about the bonuses they gave themselves. Lordy, lordy.
I become impatient for a real tea party.
-
jordan11
Oct. 29, 2007, 11:43 p.m.Bush appointment? I'll never understand why people make excuses for these fools. Don't they realize that their tax dollars are paying the salaries of these people?
-
LumFan
Oct. 30, 2007, 12:42 a.m.Gee, this is par for the course for the Bush administration. Just leave it up to the industry leaders who know what they are doing and will do the right thing if we just let them be.
Been there, done that. And we will be cleaning up after them for decades to come.
-
DarkWizard
Oct. 30, 2007, 1:49 a.m.The Moron Minions of the Imposter in Charge no longer surprise me. Bush is running America like Enron and sumptuousdigs is exactly right about the corporations "rescuing America." Unfortunately, it will be an America of their making and their image.
These jokers can't be gone soon enough. America needs some strong leaders to come to the rescue and save America from "sellout" politicians.
-
quackpot
Oct. 30, 2007, 6:56 a.m.The agency's motto will need a change.
Was: "Saving Lives and Keeping Families Safe"
Should now be: "Saving Rich-folks' Profits and Keeping Corporations Happy"
-
palamaComment has been removed: Retracted by user
-
Charlson
Oct. 30, 2007, 8:38 a.m.Let's hope congress gives the agency and the White House a big fat, FU! Let's pass this legislation and show some gumption, democrats and independents.
The safety of our children and the rest of us are more important than the profit line of corporations. The compassionate conservatives? Have not seen much compassion from the republicans but only a willingness to sacrifice american lives for greed and avarice.
-
1-2-Oscar
Oct. 30, 2007, 8:41 a.m.With increased authority comes increased responsibility. In an environment where responsibility is avoided at all costs, the costs to the public are always high.
-
Poulenc
Oct. 30, 2007, 10:11 a.m."Through an agency spokesman, Ms. Nord declined to discuss her opposition to the legislation...."
Can something be both astounding AND predictable? My only fear is that congress will once again capitulate to our actually very radical administration.
Here is yet another example of the attempt to make the world a safer place for those who already hold all--or most--of the cards.
-
nostalgia
Oct. 30, 2007, 10:17 a.m.This is a failed agency & the recommendations of Congress would only deepen the hole the agency is in
Notice:
"raise staffing levels by about 20%" BUT "staff is about 420"
Do you seriously believe increasing the staff 20% above the current 420 would really get the job done given the massive quantities of goods that are imported??
It would simply give Congress a scapegoat to point to when the inevitable failures occur
We need an entirely new model & these failed agencies need to be shut down
Just an idea - I would really need to look at it in more depth BUT what about something like Underwriters Laboratories
Aren't they an independent, not-for-profit safety certification organization?
AND why should taxpayers fund this?
Shouldn't companies that import be required to pay for the testing - they are the ones making a profit by using cheap overseas labor?
How many Federal agencies are in bed with the idustries they regulate - mining, trucking, drugs etc
-
texangelwings
Oct. 30, 2007, 10:45 a.m.Wonder what the Boss's job description requires? There has been too much cutting back on quality inspections for a long time! With less inspection, the more it saves money for companies!
I agree with Amazing1, it is long past due, for a tea party!
If they are so opposed to strengthening the agency, then why have they asked for a large increase in their budget?
Fire all of them and hire some people who want to do a quality job and protect the American People!
Thanks Beau, great find!
-
Endoscopy
Oct. 30, 2007, 11:10 a.m.Wow. Are the libs out in force. Of course the NYT is an objective newspaper.
Liberals believe that the government is the solution for everything. Pass more laws, make a bigger bureaucracy, spend more money, etc. This means raised taxes.
I lived in Michigan in the 80's. The long time Democrat governor was stepping down. He looked back over all the regulations he helped put in place. He said that while he could argue for each individual regulation the total impact was killing businesses. for example, potato chip companies in the Detroit area went from over 30 a few years before I moved there to 2 just before I left.
Liberals tend to not look an unintended consequences. There is a problem, pass a law, uh oh we didn't intend that when it is too late. This person is arguing just that point. She is looking at what the consequences would probably be. Of course liberals don't want to hear that.
-
-
Poulenc
Oct. 30, 2007, 11:53 a.m.Endoscopy, above, my whole point was to apply a word--radical--traditionally associated with the far left to the neocons--in any case, implying that the views of same are extremist.
-
-
-
joeblowe
Oct. 30, 2007, 3:22 p.m.This is nearly unbelievable, One area the Constitution DOES allow the government to monitor - "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes" =- foreign trade - and the silly b!tch DOESN'T WANT TO DO IT? Yeah, I know, Consumer Safety isn't really all about foreign trade, but lately it sure seems like a large part of it. NOT wanting more money and more staff? I can't believe I'm even hearing of such a thing. Ridiculous!
-
getreal1
Oct. 30, 2007, 3:24 p.m.Since the people that are paid way past their means of productivity can not do their job, that calls for dismissal and termination. In other words they are Fired. They should also be investigated for accepting hush money on the side. How else would all those harmful products get into our nation?
-
hyperbola
Oct. 30, 2007, 3:50 p.m.The Enron fiasco was a direct result of GOP legislation "de-regulating" business in the 1990s. The crippling of government regulatory agencies has been GOP practice ever since Reagan. You cannot expect the bush regime to be any different, after all most of the bush brothers, including george, got rich by excploiting the "deregulation" of S&Ls during the Reagan admin. Cost the taxpayers $100s of billions already then.
Bush's Role in Corporate Fraud
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/ethicalp...
-
getreal1
Oct. 30, 2007, 4:18 p.m.I'm well aware of that. Thanks for the reminding. They should have been thrown into jail with the one they said was responsible. Now that they are rich enough from defrauding us and probable cause is there, I see no reason not to petition the attorney General to do his job and attach their assets.
-
mesodude
Oct. 30, 2007, 5:47 p.m."I have no intention of resigning."
And I have a feeling she's going to soon regret she said that. The GOP doesn't seem to get that Americans really don't like it people screw around with their kids.
-
mesodude
Oct. 30, 2007, 5:48 p.m."I have no intention of resigning."
And I have a feeling she's going to soon regret she said that. The GOP doesn't seem to get that Americans really don't like it whenpeople screw around with their kids.
The first 77 comments are shown. Show all 86 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
