Do we need a regulatory agency to make sure other regulatory agencies aren't paper tigers?

[ck4829]

The Mine Safety and Health Administration was created almost 35 years ago, after deadly explosions at a Kentucky mine, with a mission to conduct more inspections of the nation’s mines and enforce safety standards more strictly. It was strengthened four years ago, after more disasters.

But it remains fundamentally weak in several areas, and does not always use the powers it has.

The agency can seek to close mines that it deems unsafe and to close repeat offenders, but it rarely does so. The fines it levies are relatively small, and many go uncollected for years. It lacks subpoena power, a basic investigatory tool. Its investigators are not technically law enforcement officers, like those at other agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency .

And its criminal sanctions are weak, the result of compromises over the 1977 Mine Act that created the agency. Falsifying records is a felony, for example, while deliberate violations of safety standards that may lead to deaths are misdemeanors.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/us/11mining.html?hp

Every time something bad happens, we always find out that the regulatory agency that could have helped avert disaster didn't have any teeth. Always.

I think it's high time we had a regulatory agency to make sure the other regulatory agencies are tough enough to their jobs.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. 75% of Congress.

Never mind the bait-and-switch.

[jody]

2. We the People are that agency and every 2 years voters can elect 435 congresspersons who control the

purse because "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives".

That's the "Rule of Gold" as intended by the authors of our Constitution.

It is the House that is quickly responsive to We the People but voters are derelict in their duty.