Exactly the same logic that applies to the entire bill. If the utility manufactured a toaster, which is clearly a product, and gave it as a bonus to its customers, that product would be subject to this bill. The whole logic of the bill is to provide a degree of predictability to the law from State to State, which does not exist at the present time. That logic is every bit as applicable to a utility as it is to General Motors or to a small business that is engaged in retail sales.
T. Gorton: “Exactly the same logic that applies to the entire bill. If the utility manufactured a toaster, which is clearly a…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a bill related to product liability and predictability in law.
Share
More from T. Gorton
I would agree that maintaining dual suppliers of high performance, environmentally acceptable fire retardants is critical to the mission of the Service.
Washington state's rural communities have also benefited by the National Rural Development Partnership, particularly those regions that have been forced from their natural resource-based economies. For the sake of those who have come to…
I expect that the $2.5 million grant program administered by NFWF will leverage at least $2.5 million overall in additional, nonfederal funds.
I would agree that the U.S. Forest Service should preserve the option to use such fire retardants in order to minimize the long-term visual impacts of wildfires.





