SB 1313, the bill by Sen. Ellen Corbett that elevates frivolous and unnecessary legislation to the level of harmfulness. Now, it seems it will be heard tomorrow in the Assembly Health Committee.
If is passes out of committee, it will be proof that no matter how bad an idea, you sell it if you sell it in the name of "health."
As mentioned in the previous post, SB 1313 seeks to shield Californians health from the pernicious effects of perflourinated compounds.
Sounds like something you'd want to be protected from...until you learn what it is" a substance that is integral to making Teflon, food packaging and anything else that needs to not stick to your food.
If is passes out of committee, it will be proof that no matter how bad an idea, you sell it if you sell it in the name of "health."
As mentioned in the previous post, SB 1313 seeks to shield Californians health from the pernicious effects of perflourinated compounds.
Sounds like something you'd want to be protected from...until you learn what it is" a substance that is integral to making Teflon, food packaging and anything else that needs to not stick to your food.
Whaaa..??
I didn't think there was any level of Democratic idiocy that could still surprise me. And yet, I find myself surprised.
A chemical that no one has ever heard of yet contributes quietly to our quality of life, and harms no one.
Why, of course it should be banned! It's a chemical! And it has a scary sounding name!
I googled around and found this from the always dependable Pacific Research Institute:
The California state Senate has passed a bill to ban the use of food packaging containing perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and sent it to the Assembly. Senate Bill 1313, authored by Sn. Ellen Corbett, would require that starting January 1st 2010 no person or company shall manufacture, sell or distribute any food contact substance that contains PFOS, PFOA, higher homologues, or precursors to these chemicals, in any concentration exceeding 10 parts per billion. Sounds like great legislation with the interest of consumers in mind.
There's more here.
If I were to theorize about the impetus for SB 1313, a few words jump to mind: environmentalists and trial lawyers. They both benefit from health hysteria. They are both skilled at exploiting gullible media that's always hungry for a new alarmist health story.
There's nothing new about the environmental community allying itself with trial lawyers to cook up a batch of scary sounding legislation designed to create more reasons for business people to fear California as the finely tuned job killing machine that its legislative and regulatory process has truly become.
What incentive does industry have to do the right thing if when they do the right thing they are second guessed, hammered in the media, hounded by the bureaucracy and hamstrung by the legislature?
SB 1313 is the poster child that explains why companies, and the jobs and tax revenue they bring with them, are refusing to expand in California and leaving in droves when they have the opportunity to do so.
It’s like an open letter to business from the California legislature that says “we don’t care if you are trying to do the right thing, or even that you are complying with the mandates we put in place…if I can vilify your product, service, issue or idea and collect a few campaign $$$ for doing it – I will.”
I have a strong suspicion that if I opened the cupboards of the environmentalists, trial lawyers and perhaps even Corbett herself I’d find at least one or two non-stick pans in their cooking arsenal. Who says hypocrisy is a dish best served cold? Fry it up!