Government Deregulation Challenged posted by Ben

Two recent events are worth noting, specifically because they represent intention on the part of lawmakers and the courts to uphold basic protections that the Republicans have avidly sought to destroy.

First, the EPA has been reprimanded yet again by the courts, this time in language that can only be called terse.

EPA Ordered to Act on Regional Smog Plan: A federal judge has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to approve or reject a smog-reduction plan for the Washington area by May 3, saying the EPA has an "unblemished record of nonperformance" in complying with parts of the Clean Air Act. [snip]

The court ruling, issued Tuesday by U.S. District Judge James Robertson, was the Sierra Club's fourth legal victory on the issue in three years. The environmental group contends that the EPA repeatedly missed deadlines and allowed localities to do less than required. The group, represented by Earthjustice, a nonprofit public interest law firm, filed its latest suit in December.

Of course, that this could have anything to do with the Bush administration's unwritten policy of filling government agencies with industry and corporate hacks is totally laughable.

Second, Michigan lawmakers are talking about standing up to a central provision of the Republican agenda, so-called tort reform. In Michigan, consumers are radically limited from being able to sue drug companies, even when major harm has been caused to them by a manufacturer's drug.

House Dems want to repeal Michigan law that protects drug makers: Democrats are expected to announce Monday a three-bill package of legislation that would repeal the state's 1996 law that shields drug makers from liability if their product was approved by the Food and Drug Administration. [snip]

The bills likely will face some opposition in the House, where the GOP has a 58-52 majority. Some Republicans don't want to repeal of the 1996 drug lawsuit law for fear it will open the door to frivolous lawsuits that will prevent drug companies from investing in research and drive up insurance premiums and other business costs.

Once again, it amazes me that the Republicans can claim with a straight face that preventing frivolous lawsuits is more important than protecting patients from bad drugs. We've already seen that the FDA is often more willing to side with business than safety standards (unless it's a drug for a woman) so to allow a system to continue where FDA approval grants total tort immunity to the drug companies is simply outrageous. Let's see if the Republican House in Michigan acts in character again...