It without this legislation becoming law does not make a distinction between privately and publicly owned. If there is a regulation to protect the consumers or environment or to protect public health, it would apply equally. There is no reason why we ought to even put them in a position where one ought to be regulated and the other not, if the reasoning for the regulation is sound.
Discussing the implications of legislation on regulation of privately and publicly owned entities.
Share
More from Henry Waxman
No Nation ever yet found any inconvenience from too close an inspection into the conduct of its officers.
The reason I qualified it is because I see no reason to oppose the amendment. It is not objectionable. But it doesn't actually fix the bill's four problems. Subsection 3(b) of the bill gives new sources amnesty from compliance with a new…
We need to make sure that companies and regulators can keep pace with innovation.
I demand a recorded vote. The CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from California will be postponed. Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Whitfield The CHAIR. It is now in…
Other voices in this conversation
