Finally, A Response To West, Texas Explosion
Click here for reuse options!The Chemical Facility Safety and Security Working Group final report to President Obama comes in response to last year’s fertilizer plant explosion in Texas, which killed 15 people and injured hundreds more.
The 121-page plan calls for strengthened regulations at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency, as well as steps to protect chemical plants from the threat of a terrorist strike.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Stuart Shapiro
Stuart is a professor and the Director of the Public Policy
program at the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers
University. He teaches economics and cost-benefit analysis and studies
regulation in the United States at both the federal and state levels.
Prior to coming to Rutgers, Stuart worked for five years at the Office
of Management and Budget in Washington under Presidents Clinton and
George W. Bush.
14 responses to Finally, A Response To West, Texas Explosion
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Bradley Forward June 8th, 2014 at 11:53
We’ve had regulations all along. If the agencies put in to watch over them does nothing but collect a paycheck. You can write all the new laws you want, and nothing changes.
That would be exactly what’s going on here. It means nothing. Posturing!
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:27
yeah except for the fact that since Texas doesn’t restrict residential developments near such facilities..yeah that’s kind of a lack of regulation actually.
I’ll put it this way.
If you knew fertilizer plants contained chemicals that have the potential to be explosive…would you let people build houses and schools near it?
I’ll assume your answer is “No.”
Texas’ answer is “Sure..go right ahead. Have fun.”
Bradley Forward June 8th, 2014 at 11:53
We’ve had regulations all along. If the agencies put in to watch over them does nothing but collect a paycheck. You can write all the new laws you want, and nothing changes.
That would be exactly what’s going on here. It means nothing. Posturing!
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:27
yeah except for the fact that since Texas doesn’t restrict residential developments near such facilities..yeah that’s kind of a lack of regulation actually.
I’ll put it this way.
If you knew fertilizer plants contained chemicals that have the potential to be explosive…would you let people build houses and schools near it?
I’ll assume your answer is “No.”
Texas’ answer is “Sure..go right ahead. Have fun.”
Shootist June 8th, 2014 at 14:18
In Texas you have a Right and an Obligation to work safely.
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:26
It’s a pity that Texas thinks it’s “right to work unsafely and an obligation to die for businesses”
Shootist June 10th, 2014 at 11:22
freedom of choice is at least as important as safety.
And the phrase, “Texans have a Right and an Obligation to work safely”. is right out of the Texas State Statutes, and is Texas’ answer to the following Nanny State message: (it’s a good answer too).
Shootist June 8th, 2014 at 14:18
In Texas you have a Right and an Obligation to work safely.
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:26
It’s a pity that Texas thinks it’s “right to work unsafely and an obligation to die for businesses”
Shootist June 10th, 2014 at 11:22
freedom of choice is at least as important as safety.
And the phrase, “Texans have a Right and an Obligation to work safely”. is right out of the Texas State Statutes, and is Texas’ answer to the following Nanny State message: (it’s a good answer too).
Tom Ward June 8th, 2014 at 15:19
They should take the following into account when making regulations:
Arson was never ruled out so you still cannot call this an accident. The circumstances point strongly toward terrorism:
Waco siege – April 19, 1993
Oklahoma city bombing – April 19, 1995
Waco fertilizer plant explosion – April 17, 2013
The last ammonium nitrate plant explosion before this was in 1994, almost 20 years prior. That one was ruled an accident due to unsafe operating procedures.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/apr/18/us-fertilizer-explosions-list-facilities-map
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:25
yeah..you might want to realize the difference between the Oklahoma city bombing and the Waco fertilizer plant explosion.
That being the one was a government building..and the other wasn’t.
Sorry..just because something goes boom does not mean it’s necessarily a terrorist act.
And considering Texas’s lackadaisical attitude to regulations and monitoring businesses….
oh also there’s the fact that terrorists just love to claim responsibility for what they do.
Tom Ward June 8th, 2014 at 15:19
They should take the following into account when making regulations:
Arson was never ruled out so you still cannot call this an accident. The circumstances point strongly toward terrorism:
Waco siege – April 19, 1993
Oklahoma city bombing – April 19, 1995
Waco fertilizer plant explosion – April 17, 2013
The last ammonium nitrate plant explosion before this was in 1994, almost 20 years prior. That one was ruled an accident due to unsafe operating procedures.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/apr/18/us-fertilizer-explosions-list-facilities-map
JKess June 10th, 2014 at 04:25
yeah..you might want to realize the difference between the Oklahoma city bombing and the Waco fertilizer plant explosion.
That being the one was a government building..and the other wasn’t.
Sorry..just because something goes boom does not mean it’s necessarily a terrorist act.
And considering Texas’s lackadaisical attitude to regulations and monitoring businesses….
oh also there’s the fact that terrorists just love to claim responsibility for what they do.