Now worker safety is being left up to businesses—that’s the way it was before OSHA, and why we got OSHA. Here one in a series in the NY Times. It’s a big issue for me: my father was killed in an unnecessary workplace accident.

Seven years ago, a Missouri doctor discovered a troubling pattern at a microwave popcorn plant in the town of Jasper. After an additive was modified to produce a more buttery taste, nine workers came down with a rare, life-threatening disease that was ravaging their lungs.

Puzzled Missouri health authorities turned to two federal agencies in Washington. Scientists at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which investigates the causes of workplace health problems, moved quickly to examine patients, inspect factories, and run tests. Within months, they concluded that the workers became ill after exposure to diacetyl, a food-flavoring agent.

But the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, charged with overseeing workplace safety, reacted with far less urgency. It did not step up plant inspections or mandate safety standards for businesses, even as more workers became ill.

On Tuesday, the top official at the agency told lawmakers at a Congressional hearing that it would prepare a safety bulletin and plan to inspect a few dozen of the thousands of food plants that use the additive.

That response reflects OSHA’s practices under the Bush administration, which vowed to limit new rules and roll back what it considered cumbersome regulations that imposed unnecessary costs on businesses and consumers. Across Washington, political appointees — often former officials of the industries they now oversee — have eased regulations or weakened enforcement of rules on issues like driving hours for truckers, logging in forests and corporate mergers.

Since George W. Bush became president, OSHA has issued the fewest significant standards in its history, public health experts say. It has imposed only one major safety rule. The only significant health standard it issued was ordered by a federal court.

The agency has killed dozens of existing and proposed regulations and delayed adopting others. For example, OSHA has repeatedly identified silica dust, which can cause lung cancer, and construction site noise as health hazards that warrant new safeguards for nearly three million workers, but it has yet to require them.

“The people at OSHA have no interest in running a regulatory agency,” said Dr. David Michaels, an occupational health expert at George Washington University who has written extensively about workplace safety. “If they ever knew how to issue regulations, they’ve forgotten. The concern about protecting workers has gone out the window.”

Continue reading.

Via TPM, this story:

An Arizona congressman temporarily stepped down from two more House committees on Tuesday and got caught up in the probe of the firings of U.S. attorneys, less than a week after the FBI raided his wife’s insurance business.

Rep. Rick Renzi said in a statement Tuesday that he was taking a leave of absence from the House Financial Services and Natural Resources committees. He stepped down from the House Intelligence Committee last week.

Even as he insisted that he had been “the subject of leaked stories, conjecture and false attacks” about a 2005 land exchange, Renzi became entangled in the U.S. attorneys probe when his chief of staff acknowledged calling Arizona’s prosecutor’s office to discuss the matter.

The prosecutor, Paul Charlton, was one of the eight prosecutors fired by the Justice Department over the winter.

Brian Murray, Renzi’s top aide, issued a statement late Tuesday acknowledging that shortly after the local media reported that the congressmen was being investigated, he called Charlton spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle.

“I called Mr. Hornbuckle seeking information about press accounts which appeared just weeks before Election Day alleging a pending indictment,” Murray said in a statement. “I left him a message asking for information about these allegations, but I was called back and told they would not comment.”

Hornbuckle refused to comment Tuesday.

Murray’s disclosure came a few hours after Charlton related the call to House investigators probing whether the firings amounted to a political purge by the Bush administration. An official with the House Judiciary Committee said Charlton did not provide details of the call but said his chief investigator reported the call to the Justice Department.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the investigation, said the committee has not received a report from Justice of that call.

And, as Josh Marshall points out, this is odd:

Read the rest of this entry »

I saw that Dennis Kucinich had supported an impeachment motion, but this is new to me.

“SR16 Senate resolution urging Vermont’s Representative in the United States House of Representatives to introduce, and Vermont’s United States Senators to support, a resolution requiring the United States House Judiciary Committee to initiate impeachment proceedings against the President and the Vice President of the United States.”

The impeachment movement, which has been building steam since the November election, got a big boost last Friday when the Vermont Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution calling for the US Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings against President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

The 16-9 vote, which saw the Senate’s six Republicans joined by only three Democrats on the losing side, will make it difficult for Vermont House Speaker Gaye Symington, a Democrat who has opposed the impeachment resolution drive, to keep the measure from being voted on the House floor. Symington has been arguing against such a resolution, claiming it would be “divisive.”

The vote in the state senate was a huge victory for grassroots Democratic activists, who had been forced over recent months to overcome opposition to impeachment from the national Democratic Party leadership, and from their own state’s Democratic Congressional Delegation. Leading Democrats, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), have been arguing that impeachment could hurt Democratic prospects among independent voters in the November 2008 elections. But impeachment activists have countered that the president and vice president have violated the law and undermined the Constitution, and that it is inappropriate to let strategic and tactical interests of the Democratic Party enter into the decision on whether to impeach. …

One newspaper, the Vermont Guardian, reports that House impeachment backers plan to spend the next few days collecting signatures from fellow representatives to introduce an identical resolution this Wednesday in their chamber. Says State Rep. Dave Zuckerman, “We will take the same language the Senate passed today and turn it in Tuesday afternoon, which gives people around the state time to call their representatives and ask them to sign it; we would then have it on the calendar for Wednesday and the speaker will either let it be voted on or have it sent to committee.” He added, “Many of us are quite pleased they took the vote, but it’s clear that it only happened because citizens got involved.”

Under Thomas Jefferson’s Manual for Rules of the House, such a joint resolution, should it pass, is an alternative route to impeachment, and would require the House Judiciary Committee to initiate an impeachment hearing to determine whether grounds for impeachment of the president and vice president exist. It would no longer be possible, in other words, for Speaker Pelosi to continue blocking impeachment and intimidating representatives from filing impeachment bills.

It would also be a strong signal that the American public wants impeachment.

Finally, it would be impossible for the corporate media to continue to maintain, as it has done for over a year now, that impeachment is simply the fantasy of a group of fringe left-wing Democrats.

Much more—continue reading.

If you do get a ticket, this article gives some ideas on how to beat it.

Via Cool Tools, this really counts as an extra-cool tool: A periodic table of visualization methods. As Cool Tools says:

If you’ve ever wondered how to model something, or were looking for new ideas for segmenting and presenting complex concepts, this is an incredible online resource. A neat graphical explanation and example of each “element” (e.g., a cycle diagram) appears as soon as your cursor scrolls over them. What I like most is that the categorisers have thoroughly sliced the categorising! For instance, they’ve color-coded their categories: data, metaphor, concept, strategy, information, and compound visualisation techniques. As if that were not enough to spark your brain, the creators also provide clues as to whether the model works best for convergent or divergent thinking, and whether it is more for an overview vs. detailed perspective. So far, I have used it mostly for inspiration, especially the metaphor models, but this resource has given me ideas and structure and the appropriate language for my work as a process designer and facilitator. I also passed this onto a 7th grade teacher friend of mine who is using it with his entire class!

You can now order your sampler packet of double-edged blades from a real Website. Check it out.

I have various Libertarian friends on one of the shaving forums, and we fell to discussing smoking bans. They, of course, thought that smoking bans were uncalled-for government intrusion and that the free market would take care of it: people who wanted smoke-free restaurants and bars could simply refuse to patronize places that allowed smoking and they would find smoke-free establishments springing up to serve that market.

Since this in fact does not happen, it made me wonder about the putative efficacy of the free market. Moreover, the logic of the situation regarding tobacco seemed to push toward one of two extremes: either tobacco is legal and okay and you should be able to smoke where you want (barring obvious fire hazards, such as ammunition factories, fireworks stores, and the like), or tobacco is harmful and it should be illegal. The compromise position of tobacco being legal while at the same time enclosed public locations and workplaces are off-limits for smoking seemed hypocritical and illogical. As one person said:

I’m with the “free market or complete ban” crowd though. I don’t see much argument for in-between approaches. There really isn’t much room for compromise.

And I think he’s right: approaching the thing logically, either it’s legal and thus okay and smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, or else it’s bad for people and simply ban it. (This is following the logic—prohibition simply doesn’t work in practice, as we’ve repeatedly observed.)

But I now realize what Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., meant when he wrote, “The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience.” I have long kept that quotation on a shelf in my mind and have taken it out to examine it from time to time, and now, in this context, I think I see what he’s saying. The complete passage:

The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience. The felt necessities of the time, the prevalent moral and political theories, institutions of public policy, avowed or unconscious, even the prejudices which judges share with their fellow men, have had a good deal more to do than the syllogism in determining the rules by which men should be governed. The law embodies the story of a nation’s development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics.

From Dumb Little Man: US Government resources for small businesses:

• Americans with Disabilities Act: Guide for Small Businesses - Discusses basic requirements businesses must follow to ensure that facilities are accessible. Also includes toll-free sources for assistance. (PDF file)
• Avoiding Office Supply Scams - Learn the most common office scams and tips to avoid receiving overpriced or unordered merchandise. (PDF file)
• Being An Entrepreneur - For various types of small businesses, explains how to create a business plan, decide on the best legal structure for your business, and market it. Also provides information on selling your business.
• Choosing a Retirement Solution for Your Small Business - Get the facts on the most popular types of retirement plans, how to establish them, the tax advantages, and more. (PDF file)
• Consumer Guide to Buying a Franchise - Want to start your own business? Find out about the benefits of franchise ownership, the limitations, choosing the best franchise for you, and investigating franchise offerings. (PDF file)
• Doing Business with GSA - The General Services Administration (GSA) buys a wide variety of products and services for federal agencies. Learn about GSA’s contracting opportunities. (PDF file)
• Facts About…Starting a Small Business - Explains how to create a business plan, research your market, price your products and services, and raise money for your business.
• General Information Concerning Patents - Learn about patent laws, application procedures, costs, and more in this revision Includes application form with instructions.
• Introduction to Federal Taxes for Small Business/Self-Employed - This helpful CD-ROM explains what you need to document expenses and deductions and file federal taxes.
• Q’s & A’s for Small Business Employers - Use this guide to develop an effective safety and health program, identify safety hazards, reduce injuries, and more. (PDF file)
• SBA Programs & Services - Find out how the Small Business Administration can help you start or expand a business. Describes SBA’s financial assistance programs, business development programs, and more. (PDF file)
• Using Consumer Reports: What Landlords Need to Know - Learn how to use consumer credit reports to evaluate rental applications of prospective tenants and what you are legally required to do. (PDF file)
• Using Credit Reports: What Employers Need to Know - Explains the legal steps you must take when using credit reports to hire or evaluate employees. (PDF file)

Look at this from TPMmuckraker’s Paul Kiel:

When Ty Clevenger, a line attorney in the Civil Rights Division, forwarded a friend’s resume to deputy division chief Bradley Schlozman, he was expecting questions about his friend’s experience as a lawyer. But what Schlozman wanted to know, according to Clevenger, was whether his friend was a Republican.

Clevenger, a member of the Republican National Lawyers Association, told Schlozman that his friend was conservative. He just wasn’t sure how active his friend was politically. The friend never got an interview.

It’s the most direct account yet of politicization at the Justice Department. There have been many other signs — and not just the administration’s preference for “loyal Bushies” as U.S. attorneys. Last week, a group of anonymous Justice Department employees wrote to the House and Senate judiciary committees to complain about politicization in the department’s hiring process. The deputy attorney general’s office, they alleged, was screening department applicants to eliminate Democrats.

“We take allegations like this one very seriously,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) told me, reacting to Clevenger’s account. “Specific to the Civil Rights Division, we are investigating complaints of politicization both in hiring and prosecutions. The Justice Department is not the place for this type of political cronyism, and we will get to the bottom of it.”

Read the rest of this entry »

A couple of notes from ThinkProgress:

First, Senator Jon Kyl:

Last night, congressional Democrats settled on an agreement “to ignore President Bush’s veto threat and send him a $124 billion war spending bill that orders the administration to begin pulling troops out of Iraq,” with a final withdrawal goal of October 1, 2007.

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) attacked the plan this morning on CNN, claiming it was “the first time I know of — in the middle of a war — that a country just announces that on a specific date it’s walking off the battlefield.” He added, “[I]t’s almost as if Americans want to say that we’re failing before our troops have a chance to get the job done.” Watch it.

Kyl doesn’t mention that on two separate occasions during the Clinton administration, he voted explicitly in favor of setting “a specific date” for American troops to “walk off the battlefield”:

– In June 1998, Kyl voted in favor of amending the National Defense Authorization Act for FY1999 to “require the President to submit Congress a plan for withdrawing United States forces from Bosnia and Herzegovina if the Congress does not so act by March 31, 1999.”

– In May 2000, Kyl voted against removing a provision from Military Construction Appropriations Act of 2001 that struck provisions requiring that President Bill Clinton withdraw all U.S. ground forces from Kosovo by July 1, 2001.

Since then, Kyl has become a critic of timelines and has voted again and again to give Bush a blank check in Iraq.

Next, Tom DeLay:

In an interview with the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review editorial board yesterday, former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) accused Senate Majoirty Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of “getting very, very close to treason” by opposing the war in Iraq. When a member of the editorial board noted that treason is a “pretty serious charge,” DeLay shot back, “And I’m serious about it.” He added that he had looked up the definition on his way to the interview (probably a good idea), and it meant “the betrayal of trust.” Watch it.

DeLay specifically attacks Reid, saying that “in the time of war, with soldiers dying on the ground, announcing that we had lost the war, is very close to treasonous.” Here’s DeLay in 1999, stating that the U.S. campaign in Kosovo will fail:

“[Milosevic is] stronger in Kosovo now than he was before the bombing. … The Serbian people are rallying around him like never before. He’s much stronger with his allies, Russians and others.” Clinton “has no plan for the end” and “recognizes that Milosevic will still be in power,” added DeLay. “The bombing was a mistake. … And this president ought to show some leadership and admit it, and come to some sort of negotiated end.”

Of course, none of this should come as a surprise. DeLay, who is currently under criminal indictment for money laundering and criminal conspiracy, has a long history of attacking the patriotism of progressives.

UPDATE: “I cannot support a failed foreign policy. … President Clinton has never explained to the American people why he was involving the US military in a civil war in a sovereign nation, other than to say it is for humanitarian reasons, a new military-foreign policy precedent. Was it worth it to stay in Vietnam to save face? What good has been accomplished so far? Absolutely nothing.” — Tom DeLay on the House floor in April 1999, when US troops were a month into their three-month mission in Kosovo

UPDATE II: Treason, as defined by the Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

UPDATE III: Greg Sargent: “Judging by the mounting hysteria of their opponents, it looks like [war critics’] aggressiveness is working.”

UPDATE IV: Carbetbagger bravely delves into DeLay’s thinking.

I quoted from the LA Times about a new investigation, but ThinkProgress sounds a cautionary note:

Rove investigator acts a lot like Rove.

Scott J. Bloch, the head of the Office of Special Counsel, “who says he is investigating Karl Rove for allegations he influenced government activity for partisan purposes is himself facing allegations of similar behavior.” In April 2005, government watchdogs and others complained that “the White House appointee had allowed his office to ’sit on’ a complaint that then-White House National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice used government funds to travel in support of President Bush’s re-election bid.”

UPDATE: CREW adds: “The fact that OSC has been charged with handling these matters suggests the possibility that the White House is orchestrating a cover-up of its illegal and improper activities.”

Take a read through this column.

Via Glenn Greenwald’s column today:

Online interview with The Washington Post, September 14, 2001

We are in some ways a much easier target for them, despite our wealth, than they are for us. And that’s a very hard thing for a rich, developed superpower to understand — that our very strength makes us vulnerable. Our strength makes us a target, and it’s hard to respond. There’s a danger that if we use our power carelessly, if we just bomb away, then we’re doing their recruiting and passing the burden on to our children. One of the things that was much more done in the French-Indochina War: a French patrol would go through a village where many of the people were on the fence in the struggle. A Viet Minh solder would kill one French soldier. The French would then open up on the entire village, killing all kinds of people. The French would then leave the village that night, at 6 o’clock, and at 7 o’clock the Viet Minh would arrive to recruit the children of those who had been killed. That’s something we need to be very aware of: to apply power not just with strength, but with wisdom. And we need to be very careful about that.

I’ve mentioned Kiva before: a micro-lending organization that allows you to make small loans directly to small businesses (or businesses-to-be) in third world countries, where a loan of $100 can have a great impact.

Two of my loans have now been repaid, a total of $225. So now I can:

1. Withdraw the $225 and keep it,
2. Donate it to Kiva, or
3. Make more loans.

I’m going with the “make more loans” option. Take a look at the site and see what loans you might make.

I put a chair next to the computer so The Wife and I could work on the book together, and the chair still sits there. Megs likes it a lot: she can sit and observe me closely, tug at my arm, and otherwise amuse herself in close proximity, her way of being sociable.

I got caught in a little maelstrom of revisions. It started innocently enough: I was just going to change the description. But then the price jumped, and I couldn’t figure out how to bring it down. I went through two on-line help sessions, but it seems to be fixed now. I hope.

And for those who tried to order the book last night: Lulu says that their system was down. It’s working now again.

I mentioned earlier that I used blackstrap molasses on my hot cereal because (in part) one tablespoon provides 20% of the daily requirement of iron. I just bought a new bottle, and while standing in line at the checkout counter, I noticed that a tablespoon also provides 20% of the daily requirement of calcium and of Vitamin A. Good stuff.

This is really outrageous. Not only has Bush’s FDA been cut to a point where it cannot carry out its responsibility to ensure the safety of our food, but now it is deliberately protecting businesses:

A second company likely imported rice protein from China that was contaminated with a chemical linked to a major pet food recall, two U.S. senators said on Monday.

Rice protein tainted with the chemical melamine was used in pet foods from at least five manufacturers who obtained the protein from one supplier, U.S. officials have said. It also made its way into feed used at a California hog farm.

Now, another company is suspected of importing rice protein from China, Democratic Sens. Richard Durbin of Illinois and Maria Cantwell of Washington said in a letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“We have learned that in addition to Wilbur-Ellis, a second United States company imported a shipment of rice protein from China that is also likely to be contaminated with melamine,” the senators wrote. “We request the FDA identify this second importer as well as those manufacturers to which it may have sold the contaminated product.”

An aide to Durbin said the senators found out about the second importer from industry sources. …

Wilbur-Ellis and the FDA declined to name the other two makers. Durbin and Cantwell called on the agency to make those two companies publicly known.