ROARegulations

By Jake Levy-Pollans, Hindsight Community Fellow, October 21, 2011 at 10:00 am

If the collapse of “too big to fail” banks and unsafe levels of pollutants in Minnesota wells didn’t do it for you, we now have a truly horrifying example of the role that smart, effective regulations can have in making our communities safer, cleaner and better poised for economic growth.

The news out of Zansville, Ohio is startling, sad and could have been avoided. When Terry Thompson released 56 exotic animals from his “wildlife preserve” before killing himself, it was the result of one man's actions but also of a state and nation’s lax regulations.

Federal law only covers the transportation of exotic animals and Ohio historically had some of the weakest laws in the country when it came to purchasing and housing such animals. And that was before last April when its conservative governor let a statewide ban on the buying and selling of exotic animals expire.

Now, 49 exotic animals are dead. The community has spent countless resources on a massive police hunt and was forced to close schools and businesses. In response to the tragedy, the state is now working to regulate ownership of exotic animals and a task force has been asked to propose new regulations to policy makers within the next thirty days.

But this is the point, smart regulations are about proactively preventing catastrophe, not retroactively responding to disaster in hopes of cleaning up a political mess. For all the unfounded arguments that conservatives like Michelle Bachmann make about regulations costing jobs, the real impact on the economy is when a lack of regulations allow banks to collapse, people to get sick, and economies to falter.

Posted in Economic Development | Related Topics: Government Policy  Regulation  Community Safety 

1 Comment

Kathryn says:

October 27, 2011 at 8:21 am

The man who had those animals had quite a police record as well.  Good regulations would have prevented him from owning those animals.  Regulations should be size and danger appropriate.  Since these animals are dangerous and the risk is not remote, it definitely should have been regulated.  On the other hand, if something has not been shown to be dangerous, it ought not be regulated.  This would be in keeping with Minnesota Statute 214.

COMMENT