Quote:
Originally Posted by ZodWallop
Yeah, that was a real shock. And it was done during the intense heat-wave we're continuing to go through. Regardless of the point he was trying to make, it's a real black-eye for him.
|
Well, the media sure seems to be playing it that way, and I agree with the idea of local government being better than higher levels of government when possible, and no doubt the law will have unintended consequences, like the water break thing, BUT, I think the media is overplaying the water break thing just for headlines. The law is about state preemption in several broad areas, not just "a law to rescind the water break rights" as some headlines suggest.
1. All the deaths cited in the articles I see already happened while the local laws are in effect, so they are all irrelevant to the discussion, just sensational headlines.
2. The local laws are in exactly three places as far as I can tell. The rest of the state has no such ordinances, and mass dehydration doesn't seem to be huge state wide problem.
3. If you need to rely on laws to make businesses let their employees drink water, you've got way bigger problems, and probably should be creating a state law rather than leaving it to local municipalities, who apparently have evil, inhumane people operating there. Get OSHA involved.
4. The law doesn't go in to effect till September, after the dogs days of summer, so, yeah the "optics" of the timing are pretty bad, but that's all. No one is losing a water break during the current heat wave because of this law.
ApK