Thursday, March 23, 2006
Editorial: Getting half-serious about chemical security
An ineffective proposal for 'quick' congressional action comes a full 54 months after 9/11.
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
A mere four and a half years after 9/11, the Bush administration says it's time to get serious about chemical plant security.
Well, kind of, sort of serious, anyway.
The first clue that the administration wasn't proposing stringent security measures for the nation's vulnerable chemical industry? Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff proposed congressional action at a forum hosted by the chemical industry.
His call for quick action by Congress to give the Homeland Security Department authority to regulate chemical plant security was filled with assurances to his audience that the industry would still be in the driver's seat.
"We're not going to micromanage," Chertoff said, noting that Homeland Security would set "performance standards" and leave it up to individual companies as how best to meet those standards.
Who would judge performance? Not the government. Chertoff proposed private auditors, "so we don't necessarily deaden our efficiency by insisting the government do everything itself."
So why the sudden sense of urgency about chemical plant security, only 54 months after terrorists demonstrated how resourcefully they could seek ways to kill Americans?
Not coincidentally, Chertoff delivered his address on the day that New Jersey's tough new regulations took effect.
Did Chertoff mention that the federal legislation he's calling for would pre-empt more stringent state regulations?
Why, yes, he did. Inconsistent rules expose businesses to "ruinous liability" and create "a regulatory regime that is doomed to failure."
Chertoff's call to action is simply more of the same from the Bush administration. Since 9/11, it has continually squelched attempts to enforce mandatory security rules on an industry that has been chronically lax in safeguarding the toxic chemicals that expose millions of Americans to the risk of deadly terrorist attacks.
Congress should ignore the Chertoff proposal and pass legislation mandating genuine security measures to protect the American public.
New Jersey's law would be an excellent starting place.
