Manufacturing And Regulations
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-08-27/manufacturing-and-regulations
One of the hottest issues in the presidential election is American manufacturing. Both President Barack Obama and his presumptive GOP rival Mitt Romney argue they are the candidate to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. But some say challenges remain that could stifle manufacturing’s growth, including stiff federal regulations. An industry report says major regulations –- those costing more than $100 million -- could reduce output in 2012 by up to $500 billion. And watchdog groups argue this does not take into account the health, safety and environmental benefits of regulations. A panel joins Diane to discuss different perspectives on manufacturing and regulation.
Guests
Stephen Gold
president of Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation.
Rena Steinzor
president of the Center for Progressive Reform and professor of law at the University of Maryland.
Ro Khanna
former deputy assistant Commerce Secretary and author of the new book, “Entrepreneurial Nation: Why Manufacturing is Still Key to America’s Future.”
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I believe a person a little older like myself,who can remember the way things were before regulations were implemented.Most people haven`t a clue on how many little things we`ve enacted that protect consumers. Mandates that give us a gallon of gas when we`ve paid for it,or a pound of food. Expiration dates that protect from out of date and spoiled food. The bar codes on packaging that saves time and cost for faster and more accurate check outs.Food inspectors at restaurants and plants that make sure the rat hair and poo in left out.
One of my first jobs out of high school was at a nationally known frozen food company.Each batch of product was inspected for wholesomeness by our USDA lab on site .NO RECALLS ALLOWED.If it was tested bad,it went into the dumpster.Unlike today.
Nearly everyday another company is fined for cheating or harming it`s customers.There is the all too familiar settlement,which pays the penalty,as long as there is no admission of guilt.WHAT A BETRAYAL TO ALL OF US!
Who wants to argue that regulation is not a result...sometimes long overdue... of abuse by industry.
Conservatives complain about "excessive" regulation as a matter of principle - but what they're really saying is they want to unleash the forces of free-market capitalism -- and let the pieces fall where they may.
This is would be all well and good if only the perpetrators paid the price. But, it's "We the People" who pay - us unwitting dupes who can't get out of the way fast enough when their schemes and shortcuts exact an immeasurable toll on the nation and the environment.
Rickets was once a health problem.In the 40`s it was solved by co-operation between government and industry.All that was needed was to enrich wheat flour.It would be wonderful if we saw that kind of co-operation today,instead of the whining.
With courts limiting liability of offending manufacturers,which result in taxpayers paying the bill,we need to get some kind of protection from irresponsible corporate greed.
President Obama has created new incentives and tax reductions for manufacturing companies overseas. Some are moving back talk about which companies
Manufacturing first move out of union territory to increase their profit margins over 40 years ago then overseas abandoning the American worker for higher profit margins and they basically suffered little to no consequences.
These fat cats at the top of that chain can afford to pay for improving their manufacturing ability by following regulations...The only thing stopping them is their desire to keep CEO's pay and profit margins higher than ever before
Which specific regulations is he talking about? Is he talking about anti-pollution regulations? Occupational Safety and Health? Wage regulations to provide a certain standard of living? How about anti-trust and wage fixing? The fact is that most corporations don't believe they should be regulated at all.
pesky pesky regulations!!! what is a little Thalidomide, a little lead, a little pcb!!!! the air give me a break it has been cleaning itself when it rains for eons..water there is plenty of clean water thanks to fish..we don't need no stinkin' regulation we just need more profits so we can create more jobs!
The fact that student nurses from China studying in the US take/send baby formula to their colleagues in China is one of the most telling argument in favor of the kind of regulations we have in this country.
All one has to do is take a business trip to China to understand the importance of clean air standards. My first time there, I arrived in a manufacturing district in Guangdong on a Saturday, and noted to my boss how clear the air was. "Just wait" he said. By mid-week, there was a yellowish fog that hung in the air and my throat started to burn. Is this the future that organizations like the the manufacturer's allliance or the chamber of commerce would have for us?
Does the report separate out the regulations that are put in place BY MANUFACTURERS to limit their competition? Who maintains and expands regulations to make it difficult for new drug companies to meet regulatory requirements? Established drug manufacturing companies! Who maintains and expands regulations to control who can perform various professional occupations? The professional associations... The big guys write the regulations to keep the little guys out.
And if they are all so eager to maintain clean air, water, worker safety, etc, why do we have so many consultants out there being hired to find ways to "thread the needle" through the regulations so that companies can just barely qualify for compliance.
Also, remember that the purpose of manufacturers is not to create jobs, it is to cut jobs.
Elaine in St. Louis
Where would we be now if they hadn't removed the regulations on the banks that were put in place after the depression? I don't think we would now be dealing with the problems caused by the great recession.
Regulations have brought us cleaner water, cleaner air. Manufacturing companies abandoned the U.S. and the American worker decades ago and it was all about making huge profit margins and exorbitant pay for CEO's. This screaming about regulations is all about profit margin. Most of them have the dough to meet regulation standards
They are NOT trying to create jobs or improve workers living standards. They are trying to increase profits for the investors and corporate officers. That's it! It's disingenuous to suggest that deregulation benefits the ordinary American.
Why is this such an issue? Just look at the regulation/litigation record of the Koch Brothers for an answer. Adding up all the fines they have paid from vioilations of their pipeline businesses will give one an answer. The Koch Brothers businesses have a long history of defying government regulations and the public health.
I'm surprised that no one has raised the issue of automation. Robotics is soon going to dominate manufacturing and yet no one has raised this issue. Even if factories return to the USA they will employ far fewer people and have far more robots.
In the end the rich will own the robots. More tax cuts means just that, not jobs for workers.
Contrary to the positions taken by your panelists, manufacturers are not working to create jobs, they are working to make money. If making money will take creating jobs they will do so, but only the bare minimum to continue making money.,
Yes. It's a global market in which all types of American industries compete.
But instead of lowering our environmental, worker and product safety standards to meet the lax or even non-existent regulations of other countries with whom we compete, why not put pressure on them to raise theirs to meet ours?
For years American industry has had to meet European Union standards in order to participate in their marketplace. And it's nowhere near as big, nor lucrative as the American consumer marketplace.
If we refused to buy cheap foreign whatevers and widgets because they were made by polluting the air and water, even if it raised the price a bit those foreign factories would meet the standard in order to sell to Americans. And, American industry would find the market playing field a little more fair.
America has the market clout. For some reason, our leaders choose to not use it. I have to quite cynically guess it's for self-serving reasons.
Are there any other examples of manufacturers that stayed in the U.S.besides GM etc and continued to make a profit? Why do we let companies like Apple pretend they could not find the manufacturing base right here in the U.S. Would have meant a few billion less for Steve Jobs every year but when will we call these folks who have abandoned and continue to abandon the American workers what they are "Greedy Bastards" is what Dylan Ratigan calls them and that's what they are
I look at regulations like this: If everyone followed the spirit of the law instead of looking for ways to get around them, there would be a whole lot less regulation. No one will ever convince me that big companies want less regulation, their actions demonstrate they want more.
I worked for a major chic manufacturing and in many cases we ACTED well in advance of govt regulations specific examples are detailed reviews post Bhopal of all operations with emphasis on risk reduction
I heard the guests speaking, and at first I was pleased that it wasn't sanitized for partisanship into soundbites; rather they were talking openly about the pros and cons of regulations from both sides of issue advocacy.
But then they all agreed that manufacturers are "trying to create jobs".
This is absolutely false. Under no amount of regulation, from zero to maximum, do any manufacturers "try to create jobs", unless it is a publicly owned industry like under communism. We live by contrast in capitalsim, in which manufacturers and other corporations RELUCTANTLY ALLOW jobs like they reluctantly allow all their other costs.
To say anything alse misses the point of how our system works, and even why we need more or less regulation.
The economic purpose of regulation is to internalize the cost of the consequences of doing business, and to create a safe and fair market place.
Without regulation, business would have no incentive to protect our environment. The market place would be a quagmire of shoddy products and services, maimed workers, and other assorted ills that in the long run cost society far more than the benefit of "business."
In a world where every person and every corporation behaved in a truly responsible manner and was willing to internalize all these costs, there would be no need for regulation. But business is about competition, and competition by its nature creates a culture of not internalizing these costs.
Regulations - Love them or hate them, the one thing that is being ignored is the consumer. Every manufacturer has to balance the regulations with the cost of production.
We can regulate until we are blue in the face to keep a product safe, the environmental impact minimal, etc. etc., but in the end, it will be the consumer that will foot the bill. The consumer may purchase a more expensive product out of conscience, but another consumer will purchase out of necessity. With money in short supply for most families, and unemployment where it is, over regulation causing inflated prices will force people to find an alternative product, likely produced in a foreign country where the over reach of government regulation is not the primary focus.
I support manufacturing and agree with the guest that it is a job producing, middle class sustaining part of our economy that has been demonized for decades.
When the Super Clean Up Fund was created Business was responsible for funding it, then Republican changed it to citizens to fund it. Why are we?
Business only should be funding the Super Fund.
Some of this is rooted in the culture of investment. Much of the regulation load is simply the process of recording manufacturing operations to prove compliance. Current technologies can provide that with an investment. This investment returns both compliance and savings and revenue gains for the company. What's needed is the patience for longer term investments, and a level playing field for those who do invest.
My family & I went on a two week trip through China in June. It was a lovely country, the people were friendly, the sights, foods & culture were incredible. We took a four day cruise down ther Yangtze River through beautiful gorges with green forests & hills & country landscape. With such sceanery, one would expect thousands of birds flying, singing, living along the river. There were no birds. There was no wildlife. If we saw a stork, it was indeed a rare event. Why? Use of pesticides & no regulation on harmful chemicals? I don't know but I certainly do not want America to ditch regulations that could result in this type of "silent spring."
I would like to commend Diane Rehm, her staff & all the public radio stations that broadcast the only intelligent debate on our airwaves today and I hope all those making comments and listening support their local radio stations. I love this program and listen to it every chance I get but I hesitate to mention how much I love this program when in the company of most my friends. You see I'm a small business owner and have employed upwards of one hundred people durring the boom. That's down to ten today. For the past thirty years, as a developer and home builder, I have seen the regulatory burden increase beyond anyone's ability to comprehend those requlations. The problem I saw today with this interview was both sides staking out their positions. The manufacturer's side not admitting that regulations, in and of themselves, are indispensible and the regulatory side never acknowledging that exsesive and incomprehensible (ex. Affordable Health Care Act at +2,000 pages) regulations have no place in our 'free enterprise' system. Diane, please bring these folks back with a focus on how we can meet in the middle and accomplish effective regulations! God laid out a plan for the world with 10 simple commandments, our Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution, the founding document for our nation, in rougly 25 pages (w/o amendments) There should be a limit on how many pages a regulation can be, it would force critical thinking in the process of regulation.
Often overlooked in these debates is the impact of local regulation and state statutory schemes. They are every bit as onerous as federal regulation, and are not usually subject to any rigorous cost/benefit screen when adopted. Moreover, the impact of each state adopting its own policies presents additional burdens to small and medium sized business seeking to do business in multiple jurisdictions.
Manufacturing and Industry can be thought of as "The Goose that Lays the Golden Eggs". They generate profits, wealth, income. No matter how you slice it; the monies in our Treasury were generated from these "profits". Manufacturers, Business owners, and all us working types are the ones who try to fill it up; while a bunch of Government big-wigs empty it. Those profits and wealth generated by Industry are our golden eggs; and they pay for everything the Government does, including Regulatory Agencies. Vilifying the rich, is like bitting the hand that feeds you. Vilifying the rich is also a tactic employed by those with "Socialist political ambition" who wish to create class division in a Country. Regulations are fine as long as they are keeping the Goose healthy and not killing it! I don't know about you, but President Obama has just about cooked my goose with his energy policies. Mandating more expensive alternative energies, while plenty of cheaper forms of energy are readily available. Either you're part of the solution or you're part of the problem. Come on November!
I was appalled by the complete lack of knowledge demonstrated today on this subject.
For many years beginning in the mid 60's I worked for R.R. Donnelley, a printing and binding company with many pieces of potentially dangerous
equipment. In a company with several thousand employees, the management, under Gaylord Donnelley, worked tirelessly to be sure everyone was safe and that any new safety feature available was added to our equipment. This was without government poking it's nose in our workplace.
I later worked for Crawford Industries, a different industry but with the same paternal attitude toward employee safety.
I could not believe my ears when the so called regulator coudn't name
one company that didn't act without government regulation. Bureacrats and pseudo intellectuals should realize that manufacturing managements
have families of their own. They care about people.
Shame on the uninformed naysayers. John