Regulatory state serves a useful purpose

Robert Samuelson’s March 5 commentary, “Who’s afraid of the ‘administrative state’?’’ was disturbing. It refers to our government agencies as “the bureaucracy” and casts it as a tool set to be used at the whim of whoever is the president.

Mr. Samuelson’s take on this is just another view from the top looking down. Anyone who dares to tinker with these agencies should be intimate with their workings at the bottom and their histories. I spent almost 50 years in manufacturing, going back so far that I remember 1970 when OSHA started. Going forward, moving through different industries, my work consisted of achieving and sustaining compliance with the ever-changing and expanding laws enacted by most of these agencies. I never worked on one that did not make sense and sometimes the benefits of the regulations were almost palpable.

The worst thing that can be said about these agencies is that they are underpowered and overstaffed with political gamers who know nothing about the importance of these regulations — or worse, cronies who are simply into reversing the laws so that the powerful can return to raping the land and poisoning its inhabitants.

Mr. Samuelson submits that regulation is a paradox, that while we love the protections it affords, we often believe it is too cumbersome — and actually slows economic growth by 0.8 percent. That’s it? Too much paperwork and slowing economic growth? That’s the argument?

According to this writing, the 2015 Code of Federal Regulations totals 178,277 pages. You know what? So what? Every rule on every page is written because some polluter or other larcenous individual did something deceptive to endanger us.

Donald Trump’s latest broken campaign promise provides for Chinese steel to be used on the Keystone pipeline. Go ahead, ask a metallurgist about the performance risks of that steel over ours. You know, China does not have a pesky administrative state.

Jim Cassidy

Henderson

Deep question

In recognition of “A Day Without Women” did Caitlin Jenner go to work on Wednesday? This is one of the deep, deep philosophical questions of our time that can be answered only by getting all your news from Facebook.

David Baker

Las Vegas

Political pawn

In response to Victor Joecks’ Wednesday commentary, “There is no right to free birth control”:

Mr. Joecks didn’t mention that Nevada already has an existing law that requires most health insurance plans which cover prescription drugs and outpatient care to also include coverage for contraceptive drugs and devices without an additional copay. The bills in question expand contraceptive coverage from a three-month supply, which is currently already existing law, to a 12-month supply.

These bills — Assembly Bill.249 and Senate Bill 233 — are about preventive health care and affordable, accessible contraception. Specifically, affordable birth control, mammograms and other women’s health care, such as hormone replacement therapy.

Mr. Joecks shouldn’t use fertility as a political pawn. These bills are not Democrat or Republican. They are bipartisan and they affect all women in Nevada, regardless of their political beliefs. These bills do not promote abortion. That is just a “red herring” to mislead.

Connie Munk

Las Vegas

Scratch and sniff

A half century ago, in the face of Dutch elm disease, the city of Chicago began to systematically remove elms and replace them with maple shade trees — all in the name of “beautification” (and, in hindsight, an unanticipated — although minuscule — volley against global warming). I have lived in the Las Vegas Valley for 30 years. Annually, there are news reports that confirm the suspicions of local allergy sufferers — myself included — that each successive year brings greater suffering, more lost work time and increased medical interventions.

I’m wondering whether it would be in the best interest of local residents, employers, health insurer, and governmental institutions to brainstorm and perhaps begin a new public health initiative to remove and replace the most serious allergenic offenders — as I understand them to be, European olive trees and fruitless mulberries.

The health and financial benefits would easily outdistance the justification for Chicago’s initiative 50 years ago.

Michael Mas

Las Vegas