OSHA

CEI Podcast for May 26, 2011: President Obama Proposes Deregulation

by Ryan Young on May 26, 2011

in Podcast, Regulation

Have a listen here.

Cass Sunstein, President Obama’s regulatory czar, announced today that the administration intends to repeal regulations from 30 different agencies. CEI Vice President for Strategy Iain Murray thinks this is a good step, though a small one. He estimates today’s proposal would save about $1.5 billion, which is one-tenth of one percent of the $1.75 trillion total burden of federal regulation.

Regulation of the Day 151: Water Heaters

by Ryan Young on September 27, 2010 · 4 comments

in Environment, Health and Illness, Nanny State, Regulation, Regulation of the Day

The EPA recommends setting your water heater to no higher than 120 degrees Fahrenheit. But OSHA recommends setting it to 140 degrees Fahrenheit. Why the difference?

“If you turn your water heater down to 120 degrees Fahrenheit; you will cut your water-heating costs by 6-10 percent,” says EPA. Doing so also uses less energy.

But 120 degrees is not hot enough to kill the Legionella pneumophila bacteria. Legionnaire’s disease causes both flu-like and pneumonia-like symptoms. The disease is most often caught by inhaling the spiral-shaped bacteria via water mist, such as in the shower or near a lake or stream. That’s why OSHA recommends setting your water heater hot enough to kill the bacterium – 140 degrees.

Legionnaire’s disease got its name when the Pennsylvania American Legion celebrated America’s 1976 bicentennial at a hotel with contaminated water. More than 200 people were treated for pneumonia. 34 died. The newly discovered Legionella pneumophila bacteria turned out to be the cause. That and other bacteria are why OSHA recommends 140 degrees.

EPA and OSHA are free to publish all the recommendations they want. But hopefully they won’t impose one standard or other on the entire country. One is expensive; the other would kill people.

Fortunately, you are still free to set your water heater how you choose. If you place a high value on saving money and energy, and you have your health, 120 degrees is the way to go. But if you are elderly or infirm, or you have children in your household, 140 degrees is probably better for you. When it comes to your water heater, you know best. Hopefully OSHA and EPA will continue to recognize that.

(via Sam Kazman)

Friday Regulation Roundup

by Ryan Young on April 9, 2010

in Economy, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Regulation, Stimulus to Nowhere

Some of the stranger governmental goings-on I dug up over the week:

-The federal government is spending $73,000,000 this year on the Agricultural Water Enhancement Program.

-The federal government has 5,647 words of formaldehyde regulations for the workplace.

-The federal government has an Arthritis Advisory Committee. They’re meeting on May 12 if you care to attend.

-Government spends $2,000,000 on phone lines for a town of 80 people, some of whom already own satellite dishes.

-OSHA considers sand a poison because it contains silica.

-Vermont to spend $150,000 to build a tunnel for salamanders to cross a road safely.

-The federal government has a Highbush Blueberry Council.

-A fish hatchery in South Dakota is getting $20,000 in stimulus money for new light fixtures.

-In Virginia, it is illegal in many instances to turn on your air conditioning before May 1. Cato’s Tom Firey has more.

-EPA says that de-icing fluid for windshields is an environmental hazard. Worried airline pilots say the EPA is the real safety hazard.

-It is illegal in Kentucky for anyone under 18 to play pool without photo ID and written parental consent.

Regulation of the Day 81: Porn

by Ryan Young on December 9, 2009

in Deregulate to Stimulate, Economy, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Regulation, Regulation of the Day

Marginal Revolution’s Alex Tabarrok points to a proposed rule in California that would reclassify adult film actors as being subject to certain employment regulations. The unintended consequences are potentially fatal:

California’s anti-discrimination laws prohibit requiring an HIV test as a condition of employment; therefore the adult film industry’s current testing process, in which every performer is tested for HIV monthly, would be illegal. Nor would adult film producers be allowed to “discriminate” by refusing employment to HIV-positive performers. As a result, untested and HIV-positive performers would be able to work in the industry, raising the risks of HIV outbreaks–particularly since condom breakage or slippage can occur.

Sounds like regulators and activists need to think that one through a little more carefully.

Senate Committee Rubberstamps Left-Wing Ideologue to Head Powerful OSHA Agency Despite His Anti-Gun and Pro-Junk-Science Views

by Hans Bader on November 18, 2009 · 2 comments

in Employment, Health and Illness, Labor, Legal, Nanny State, Personal Liberty, Politics as Usual, Precaution & Risk, Regulation, Sanctimony

David Michaels, a left-wing ideologue who supports junk science and seeks to restrict gun possession, has been approved by the Senate Health Committee to head the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Only two committee members, both Republicans, voted against Michaels.

The vote occurred with no discussion, and no hearing was even held on his nomination, although hearings have consistently been held on OSHA nominees in the past, even for far less controversial picks.

Lawyer and Second Amendment expert, David Kopel explains how Michaels wants to ban guns in and near workplaces, and could use his position at OSHA to do so, if the political climate shifts in favor of gun control. (Some businessmen in high-crime areas possess guns to protect themselves against armed robbers, and even strict local gun-control laws have generally contained exceptions to allow such businesses to defend themselves.)

The fact that such bans might undermine, rather than enhance, workplace safety would not deter Michaels, who would be happy to rely on junk science.   Michaels wants to reverse the Supreme Court’s Daubert decision limiting the use of junk science.

As the Washington Times noted, “Mr. Michaels also is an anti-gun zealot who has described ‘gun violence’ as an issue of ‘public health’ that ‘invariably demands more and stronger regulation, not less.’ As Walter Olson of the Manhattan Institute explained, by way of warning, on Aug. 15: ‘That’s by no means irrelevant to the agenda of an agency like OSHA, because once you start viewing private gun ownership as a public health menace, it begins to seem logical to use the powers of government to urge or even require employers to forbid workers from possessing guns on company premises, up to and including parking lots, ostensibly for the protection of co-workers. In addition, OSHA has authority to regulate the working conditions of various job categories associated with firearms use (security guards, hunting guides, etc.) and could in that capacity do much to bring grief to Second Amendment values.’”

As I noted in a New York Times story, Michaels’ appointment could “dramatically alter OSHA’s approach to ensuring workplace safety.” Michaels has been called “one the nation’s foremost proponents of allowing junk science to be used in jackpot-justice lawsuits.”

Many business groups raised concerns about his nomination and extreme views.

Iain Murray notes that Michaels seeks to ban useful products from the workplace based on imaginary risks. One newspaper calls Michaels “virulently anti-business.”

The lopsided committee vote in favor of Michaels is probably explained by log-rolling.  As The Wall Street Journal has noted, some Republican committee members likely voted along with their Democratic colleagues to approve Michaels, in exchange for Obama’s recent nomination of an aide to the ranking Republican committee member, to sit on the board of an independent agency that is supposed to be bipartisan (the NLRB), but which Obama could conceivably have made even more partisan and liberal than it is by nominating a liberal RINO rather than a GOP aide to that post (that might have invited a filibuster, but there are only 40 Republican Senators, and it takes 41 votes to successfully filibuster a nomination).

Regulation of the Day 70: Combustible Dust

by Ryan Young on November 10, 2009 · 1 comment

in Nanny State, Regulation of the Day

OSHA has published a proposed rule to regulate one of the greatest threats to mankind: combustible dust.

It is defined as “all combustible particulate solids of any size, shape, or chemical composition that could present a fire or deflagration hazard when suspended in air or other oxidizing medium.”

Maybe it speaks well of workplace safety if OSHA has made combustible dust one of its highest priorities.

A pessimist might counter that OSHA, having regulated everything else, has been reduced to regulating obscurities in its never-ending search for something to do, and for someone to command.

OSHA Nominee Is Anti-Gun Ideologue and Junk Science Peddler

by Hans Bader on August 17, 2009 · 6 comments

in Labor, Legal, Personal Liberty, Precaution & Risk

Obama has nominated David Michaels, an anti-gun activist, to head the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), a powerful agency that regulates real and perceived hazards in the workplace. This raises the specter of federal bans on the storage or carrying of firearms in or near workplaces (even though some businessmen in high-crime areas possess guns to protect themselves against armed robbers).

Michaels also has links to wealthy breast implant lawyers, who relied on junk science to drive silicone implants from the market, even though they remained available to consumers in most other Western countries because of their lack of major health risks. (The lawsuits over silicone also harmed patients who need life-saving silicone products like silicone shunts that had nothing to do with breast implants or cosmetic procedures, making them scarcer, less available, and more expensive).

Michaels wants to reverse the Supreme Court’s Daubert decision limiting the use of junk science.

If OSHA succeeds in restricting the storage or possession of guns in workplaces, it may take some time to undo even if a less liberal administration comes to power. For example, in March, a judge blocked a Bush Administration change allowing visitors to national parks to carry concealed weapons, claiming that it might have environmental impacts. A judge could rely on similarly conjectural reasoning to block revisions to OSHA regulations needed to repeal an OSHA ban on people storing their guns in the workplace.

Other Obama appointees, like attorney general Eric Holder, are also big supporters of gun control. (Holder has argued that the Second Amendment does not protect any individual right).

Many (but not all) state constitutions protect the right to possess a firearm. But liberal administrations often seek to use federal workplace laws to try to override rights protected by state constitutions or laws. For example, the Clinton Administration argued that a federal law called Title VII overrode California’s broad equal-protection guarantees, which forbade racial quotas and preferences in government contracting, college admissions, and public employment. This “preemption” argument was rejected by a federal appeals court in Coalition for Economic Equity v. Wilson (1997). (Ironically, liberal lawyers often oppose preemption when it expands individual freedom, like federal curbs on baseless state-court lawsuits. The Obama Administration opposes preemption when it would prevent trial lawyers from bringing lawsuits). By the way, discriminatory racial preferences are included in the health-care “reform” bills backed by the Obama Administration, drawing criticism from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.