Bush hacks stick it to workers -- again

Barack Obama will become President of the United States in just 50 days, but the still-President, George W. Bush, is still trashing the place prior to going out the door. The latest outrage is the rush to complete a rule the new President is strongly opposed to. Somehow I don't think that's the way it's supposed to work, but that's the way it's working. If you are committed to safer workplaces in this country, the new rule is a monstrosity that will make jobs more dangerous for whoever will still have a job after this administration's policies have played out:

The rule, which has strong support from business groups, says that in assessing the risk from a particular substance, federal agencies should gather and analyze "industry-by-industry evidence" of employees' exposure to it during their working lives. The proposal would, in many cases, add a step to the lengthy process of developing standards to protect workers' health.

Public health officials and labor unions said the rule would delay needed protections for workers, resulting in additional deaths and illnesses.

[snip]

The Labor Department proposal is one of about 20 highly contentious rules the Bush administration is planning to issue in its final weeks. The rules deal with issues as diverse as abortion, auto safety and the environment. One rule would make it easier to build power plants near national parks and wilderness areas. Another would reduce the role of federal wildlife scientists in deciding whether dams, highways and other projects pose a threat to endangered species. (Robert Pear, New York Times [h/t stillwagon])

The rule would require an advance notice of proposed rule-making that would solicit public comment, sometimes done by OSHA and the Mine Safety and Health Administration but not required. The extra step entails another lengthy delay in the already long rule-making process. It's not as if this administration has a record of hasty rule making in the occupational health and safety arena. Indeed it has promulgated only one rule in 8 years, and that on account of a court order. Known hazards from silica and beryllium have gone unaddressed. The new rule will not only require and extra step, but will also require assembling additional information about exposures on an industry-by-indutry basis, information that often doesn't exist and will be difficult, time consuming and costly to get. You don't kneed to know what exposures are in every industry in order to know that certain levels of exposure shouldn't be occurring in any industry.

Meanwhile an administration that couldn't manage to make any rules protecting workers have a bunch of other rules queued up for the next 50 days. Here's a sample:

One rule would allow coal companies to dump rock and dirt from mountaintop mining operations into nearby streams and valleys. Another, issued last week by the Health and Human Services Department, gives states sweeping authority to charge higher co-payments for doctor's visits, hospital care and prescription drugs provided to low-income people under Medicaid. The department is working on another rule to protect health care workers who refuse to perform abortions or other procedures on religious or moral grounds.

The bottom line is that the Bush administration hacks are doing their usual job of carrying water for their paymasters in the business community and the Far Right. Those patrons, of course, couldn't be happier about these rules. Happy as pigs in shit. Which is what they are.

More like this

well, don't forget, Bush said he wanted a smooth transition of power. and when Bush says one thing, the past eight years have shown us we will usually get the polar opposite.

By Nomen Nescio (not verified) on 01 Dec 2008 #permalink

The department is working on another rule to protect health care workers who refuse to perform abortions or other procedures on religious or moral grounds.

I love this. Somehow, the "culture of personal responsibility" doesn't extend to getting fired for refusing to do your job. God forbid you should have to accept the logical consequences of that decision.

I've occasionally been handed jobs I didn't feel too good about doing, morally speaking. The option of turning them down and demanding ongoing payment never occurred to me.

I love this. Somehow, the "culture of personal responsibility" doesn't extend to getting fired for refusing to do your job. God forbid you should have to accept the logical consequences of that decision.

Well, unless you tell your boss you think it's a bad idea to scoop up mercury with your bare hands. Then you deserve to be fired. And you're probably a foreigner or a terrorist. Only terorists need masks to work with hydrogen sulfide or phosgene, don'tchaknow.

By JThompson (not verified) on 01 Dec 2008 #permalink

Hell, if you were in the Army, they'd just order you to volunteer for the job, eh?

By Hank Roberts (not verified) on 01 Dec 2008 #permalink