The bill is also strongly opposed by the environmental community, the National Governors Association, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and a bipartisan group of 37 state attorneys general. Faced with the prospect of spending countless hours and dollars in court, these groups argue, local officials would be pressured to approve projects that pose risks to neighborhoods and the community, dangerously undermining local land use planning which balances everyone s rights. Business groups and conservatives have long sought to reduce the number of fines handed out by OSHA, and S. 1237 would accomplish this by allowing fines only when employers willfully or repeatedly ignore safety requirements. The goal here is to make OSHA an advisor that does not enforce federal regulations, but rather encourages employers to voluntarily correct workplace problems. Labor unions worry this approach will erode already inadequate enforcement at OSHA, allowing employers to further neglect the safety and health of their workers.
Democrats say the bill has no chance of passing on the floor unless major concessions are made.
Condit contends that the legislation is needed to reduce undue burdens on the private sector, which he proposes to solve by requiring additional analyses on private sector mandates and an erecting new procedural barriers to the passage of private-sector mandates. If the bill effectively dissuades lawmakers from voting for new laws that impose costs on the private sector, as Condit hopes, many public protections could become state responsibilities. That would balkanize many regulatory protections creating different standards in different states. Back to the Regulatory News home page.