Home / General / Make American Workplaces Deadly Again

Make American Workplaces Deadly Again


The daily outrage from Trump’s minions:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will delay implementation of an Obama-era chemical safety rule for nearly two years while it reassesses the necessity of the regulation.

The EPA announced on Monday that Administrator Scott Pruitt signed a directive last Friday delaying the chemical plant safety standards until at least Feb. 20, 2019.

The move comes after the EPA delayed the regulation in March amid discussions over the rule’s impact on businesses.

“We are seeking additional time to review the program, so that we can fully evaluate the public comments raised by multiple petitioners and consider other issues that may benefit from additional public input,” Pruitt said in a statement.

Obama regulators in December finalized a rule beefing up safety standards at chemical production plants, calling for new emergency requirements for manufacturers regulated by the EPA.

Officials moved to overhaul chemical safety standards after a 2013 explosion at a chemical plant in Texas killed 15 people. Their rule would require companies to better prepare for accidents and expand the EPA’s investigative and auditing powers.

True winning is ensuring more workers die on the job from unsafe working conditions. Of course like 90% of Trump’s agenda, this is just bog standard Republicanism.

Maybe Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn can just get rid of the limitations on our freedom to die at work with their fun constitutional convention.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • DrDick

    Cheating, maiming, and killing workers gives Trrump, and all the Republicans, a thrill up his leg.

  • I thought we had established that the negligent parties to the explosion were those who got killed.

  • Snarki, child of Loki

    The GOP needs to “lead by example” on the whole “getting killed at work” thing, just saying.

  • ChrisS

    From the article: ““The Tea Party needs a new mission,” DeMint told USA TODAY. “They realize that all the work they did in 2010 has not resulted in all the things they hoped for. Many of them are turning to Article V.””

    No shit. You mean to tell me that delusional fantasies don’t come true? It’s funny that so many (all?) RWNJs consider themselves the sole possessors of “common sense” yet fail to see why their ideas fail again and again and again. Instead of going back to the drawing board, they just double down on the crazy.

  • kped

    Their rule would require companies to better prepare for accidents and expand the EPA’s investigative and auditing powers.

    Hold it there, don’t want to get too ahead of ourselves! Why should those companies better prepare for accidents? what a burden!

    Fucking psychopaths.

    • efgoldman

      Why should those companies better prepare for accidents? what a burden!

      Serious question: does anyone have standing to sue Pruitt/EPA to enforce the rule?

  • Mike G

    Some chemical plant workers will die or get cancer because of this.

    The rest of them will proclaim that it could never happen to them because Jesus, and keep voting for Trump.

    Sometimes you can’t fix stupid.

    • The response of the survivors of the West, Texas factory explosion was sympathy for the owners because they went to church with those people.

      • ThresherK

        “The owners are just like us! Except they have lots more money, and their blood tests don’t send doctors to the Mayo Clinic to coin new disease names.”

  • Meathooks McGee

    Industry doesn’t WANT to do more root-cause investigations, and why should they pay for third-party audits after an incident? Because clearly, if you’ve had a reportable incident, you’re definitely capable of auditing yourself!

    The hell. It’d be nice if the idiots in the Cabinet didn’t reflexively think that more regulations are automatically bad if, y’know, they might save some lives down the line.

  • Brett

    I hope we do get an Article V Constitutional Convention. It opens the door to more radical changes and fixes to the US, in the same way that the original US constitutional convention was called to fix the Articles of Confederation before dumping them for a brand new constitution (and of course let’s not forget the French Revolution).

    And how would states prevent a “runaway convention” that could make wholesale changes to the Constitution on everything from religion and gun rights?

    Proponent say their application limits of the scope of a convention to amendments that deal with federal term limits, fiscal restraints on the federal government and limits on Washington’s power.

    Bu some legal experts question whether organizers can limit the topics at all. “When there’s a constitutional convention, in a sense, all bets are off,” said Michael Gerhardt, an expert on the Constitution and a law professor at the University of North Carolina. “I would think almost anything would be fair game.”

    That’s what I’m talking about. If DeMint and friends think they can limit it to just their pet topics, they’ve got another thing coming.

    • Snarki, child of Loki

      It’s not as if that gang pays any heed to the parts of the (current) Constitution that they don’t like.

      Damn those Founders for not adding a “summary death penalty” provision the the Emoluments Clause anyhow.

  • Proto-Morlock

    It’s really all about competitive economic advantage, and Making America Great Again. The Chinese have pulled ahead of us in industrial accident production, and we need to catch up.


It is main inner container footer text