« Back to story "Studies on Chemical In Plastics Questioned"

Story Comments

Posted by: Beau7890 1 year, 6 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

Neutral
Beau78901 year, 6 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

Not just the FDA and the FCC. The Consumer Product Safety Commission and the FAA are the same. There's been a concerted effort to turn regulatory agencies into advoctes for business curing the Bush adminsitration--analogous to the way Cabinet departments and other agencies under the purview of the executive branch have become overtly political, and at the urging of the White House.

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 3) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
3 Replies

loading ...
- Neutral
  Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  For instance, during Congressional hearings last month, FAA inspectors said that when they tried to blow the whistle on airlines routinely flying planes in need of safety checks, they were stifled by higher-ups:
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
  "When they attempted to report those issues to officials higher up the FAA chain of command, they were harassed, threatened and even punished, they said.
  "They also said the FAA had gone from aggressively regulating airlines to treating them like customers or clients. Lawmakers and outside safety experts have expressed similar worries about regulators' coziness with the carriers."
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  0 Replies
  
  loading ...
- Neutral
  doppich1 year, 6 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  I'd say, Beau, that the "concerted effort" has been a resounding success from the viewpoint of the businesses.
  But, as you say, it is only as staffed (and sometimes de-staffed) and run by the Bush administration that these agencies fail in their jobs. I just wish the folks who rail against these agencies with legitimate and necessary functions would say "the Bush FDA." To criticize the generic "FDA" plays right into the right wing's anti-regulatory world view.
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 4) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  1 Reply
  
  loading ...
  - Neutral
    Beau78901 year, 6 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    You're right that it's become far worse over the term of the Bush administration, and as you might guess, I certainly don't want to support the idea that all government regulation is ineffective.
    But the emasculation of regulatory agencies run by the executive branch began under Ronald Reagan. It's been a downhill slide since then, only completely falling off the cliff since W. took over.
    To be absolutely clear: The policies of deregulation starting in the 1980s have definitely resulted in less effective government and less protection for citizens--but that shouldn't be used as an argument that governmental regulation can't be effective, or that an unfettered free market will solve all problems. Deregulation and defunding have destroyed the protections regulatory agencies provided quite well when they had the muscle.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...