[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 74 (Tuesday, June 14, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: June 14, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                         OSHA REFORM--H.R. 1280

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
February 11, 1994, and June 10, 1994, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. 
Ewing] is recognized during morning business for 5 minutes.
  Mr. EWING. Madam Speaker, I want to take this time today to discuss 
the OSHA reform legislation that is proceeding through this Congress. I 
would start out by stating the premise that I believe labor and 
management agree that work place safety is of paramount importance. 
Unfortunately, that is about the extent of where agreement exists on 
the OSHA reform legislation.
  I think we are on the wrong track with the legislation that is moving 
through Congress. It is known as the Proposed Comprehensive 
Occupational Safety and Health Act, COSHA, H.R. 1280.
  While creating lots of new regulations and rules, I think it will do 
very little to improve work place safety.
  The Employment Policy Foundation estimates that the Ford-Kennedy OSHA 
proposal will cost the private sector $63 billion. Members, the private 
sector is you and I.
  The impact on small business and family farms of COSHA will cost 
small business and farmers approximately $40 billion per year.
  The bill establishes broad new argicultural safety and health 
standards. The bill will result, I believe, in de facto union 
organization of farm workers throughout this country, because it 
mandates safety and health committees be formed.
  The bill will require that farm employees be provided lifetime 
medical monitoring and health evaluation for their work force.
  Members, it is has been the policy of many administrations to have 
cheap and reasonable food for the American people. We cannot add 
enormous costs in the billions of dollars on agriculture and expect to 
continue to have a reasonable, cheap food policy. It is more 
legislative interference, I am afraid, the bottom line of all this 
legislation is more legislative interference in labor-management 
relations.
  I really resent when Members come to Congress, such as the sponsors 
or the promoters of this legislation do, to get through legislation 
what they cannot get at the bargaining table.
  My colleagues, I would just talk a little bit about the excessive 
regulation in government. Probably nothing infuriates the American 
people more. Recently, though, as far as environmental issues, we had a 
6-year-old Robyn Lerman of Highland Park, IL. This young lady had to go 
to the dentist to have a couple of teeth extracted. She was terrified 
at the prospect of this, but was reassured that the tooth fairy would 
visit her and she could put these teeth under her pillow and that made 
her feel better.
  Well, she went to the dentist and the teeth were taken out. And she 
survived, of course. But the dentist would not give her parents the 
teeth. The teeth had been classified by OSHA as on a list of 
potentially biologically hazardous material and were taken from the 
family and the young lady went home without here teeth and without the 
opportunity to put those under her pillow for the tooth fairy.

                              {time}  1110

  We can carry regulation, government bureaucracy, much too far. The 
OSHA reform bill does that. I hope that this Congress will look closely 
at it, and that we will listen to our constituents and to the business 
community as we examine this legislation so that we can achieve the 
goal we do agree on: workplace safety for every American workers, in a 
way that we can afford, and one that will not increase government 
interference in business and in our lives.

                          ____________________