Regulate me, please
The New York Times today fronts an article ("In Turnaround, Industries Seek U.S. Regulation", 9/16/07)) about a seeming paradox, large corporations and the industry associations that represent them are asking the federal government for more not less regulation. "For toys and cars, antifreeze and fireworks, popcorn and produce and cigarettes and light bulbs, manufacturers are calling for federal health, safety, and environmental mandates." This in spite of a long track record of pushing (quit effectively) an increasingly laissez-faire approach.
Why are they doing this? The article suggest several reasons: "growing competition from inexpensive imports that do not meet voluntary standards, and a desire to head off liability lawsuits and pre-empt tough state laws or legal actions that were in response to laissez-faire."
What big corporations want is for the federal government to set standards that will overrule even tougher state standards.These has been a rise in regulation from a growing number of states, led by California, to make up for the gaps in regulation presided over the Bush administration, which has systematically weakened rules and defunded regulatory agencies.
The article quotes one policy expert stating "I have never before seen so many industries joining a push for regulation." Some are even joining with environmental and safety group that had previously been at war with.
So why is Altria (Philip Morris) calling for the regulations of cigarettes and General Electric and Phillips joining to push for more regulation of light bulbs? Pure self-interest, a new strategy in an old war, one of getting the government to help big companies maintain market share. All of the new regulations will be used to set a barrier to entry for smaller (usually Chinese) companies into the market. In these cases, it is easier for the established players to conform to a higher level of regulation, and to help define what those regulations might
2:55:13 PM 
|
|
