×
Occasionally, you run into a story that so perfectly illustrates a vague concept that it seems unlikely to be actually real, even though it is. Today the political appointee in charge of consumer safety has come out against expanding protections for consumer safety, perfectly illustrating what Rick Perlstein has called E. coli conservatism:
On the eve of an important Senate committee meeting to consider the legislation, Nancy A. Nord, the acting chairwoman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has asked lawmakers in two letters not to approve the bulk of legislation that would increase the agency’s authority, double its budget and sharply increase its dwindling staff.Ms. Nord opposes provisions that would increase the maximum penalties for safety violations and make it easier for the government to make public reports of faulty products, protect industry whistle-blowers and prosecute executives of companies that willfully violate laws.Her position is even more radical than that of the manufacturers she regulates:
Manufacturers had agreed to another provision that would assign independent laboratories to test and certify the safety of products, rather than the agency. But Ms. Nord said she objected to the provision. She preferred that the agency determine the conditions for using independent laboratories.Some of Ms. Nord’s complaints were similar to the ones that business groups and manufacturers have raised, including that the legislation would be unnecessarily burdensome. But in other areas, like whistle-blower protection, her complaints went beyond those of industry.While companies generally have not objected to giving protection to whistle-blowers in the industries regulated by the commission, for example, she said it would “dramatically drain the limited resources of the commission, to the direct detriment of public safety.”I shouldn't be surprised by this stuff anymore, but just when you think it can't get any crazier it does. --Sam Boyd
