Regulations In Search Of A Problem
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
One of the marks of the Obama administration is the intention to bring about greater command and control oversight, inventing their authority to exercise the power they wish to initiate. Having not always accomplished the objectives that they’ve desired in legislative ways and actually having been pushed back in the court system (by such notable authorities as the U.S. Supreme Court), government agencies are simply pressing forward through their own designs and systems. A current theme appears to be the construction of “guidance documents” which are leveraged to impose regulatory controls.
We’ve seen this end-run tactic in play with the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corp of Engineers in their quest to undo the Supreme Court ruling on whether they can bring every drop of water under their controlling boots.
There has even been a spin-off of this “guidance” strategy launched by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, who also have been dreaming about ways in which to take federal control over farm equipment moving up and down roads. In their one-size fits all mindset and under the guise of “better safety” (who can argue against wanting Big Brother’s “protection”), the agency sought input on gaining oversight on farm equipment.
Review of their request for input demonstrates the lengths federal agencies will go to in order to stretch and apply imagination to find ways of making farm equipment that nearly always travel on intra-state roads fit their inter-state authority. Farm tractors should be treated the same way as over-the-road semi-trucks…Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDL) ought to be required for everyone climbing aboard an old John Deere…and if you are involved with a rental agreement which is based on share-cropping, you better be considered in the mix as well.
This comment letter, submitted by the American Farm Bureau Federation, does an outstanding job of giving the would-be regulators a clear understanding on how they are not relating to what happens in the real world and where their invention of having authority falls short.
Not being quite as obliged to worry about whether their feathers got ruffled over a more straight-forward approach, Nevada Farm Bureau’s comments took a few less pages.
The issue even drew attention from a significant voice in agricultural policy matters, U.S. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, who co-wrote with 22 other U.S. Senators a letter of concern on what the agency was planning to do…
One of the marks of the Obama administration is the intention to bring about greater command and control oversight, inventing their authority to exercise the power they wish to initiate. Having not always accomplished the objectives that they’ve desired in legislative ways and actually having been pushed back in the court system (by such notable authorities as the U.S. Supreme Court), government agencies are simply pressing forward through their own designs and systems. A current theme appears to be the construction of “guidance documents” which are leveraged to impose regulatory controls.
We’ve seen this end-run tactic in play with the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corp of Engineers in their quest to undo the Supreme Court ruling on whether they can bring every drop of water under their controlling boots.
There has even been a spin-off of this “guidance” strategy launched by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, who also have been dreaming about ways in which to take federal control over farm equipment moving up and down roads. In their one-size fits all mindset and under the guise of “better safety” (who can argue against wanting Big Brother’s “protection”), the agency sought input on gaining oversight on farm equipment.
Review of their request for input demonstrates the lengths federal agencies will go to in order to stretch and apply imagination to find ways of making farm equipment that nearly always travel on intra-state roads fit their inter-state authority. Farm tractors should be treated the same way as over-the-road semi-trucks…Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDL) ought to be required for everyone climbing aboard an old John Deere…and if you are involved with a rental agreement which is based on share-cropping, you better be considered in the mix as well.
This comment letter, submitted by the American Farm Bureau Federation, does an outstanding job of giving the would-be regulators a clear understanding on how they are not relating to what happens in the real world and where their invention of having authority falls short.
Not being quite as obliged to worry about whether their feathers got ruffled over a more straight-forward approach, Nevada Farm Bureau’s comments took a few less pages.
The issue even drew attention from a significant voice in agricultural policy matters, U.S. Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, who co-wrote with 22 other U.S. Senators a letter of concern on what the agency was planning to do…
“The FMCSA proposed rule changes would provide no proven benefit, and would only serve to excessively and unnecessarily overburden our agriculture producers who are already overstrained by government regulations,” said Senator Roberts. “Farming can be dangerous, and we want to make sure these proposed rules will keep our producers safe while they’re doing their jobs.”We’re now down to the waiting to see how the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration moves forward, wondering if the comments will have any influence – or if they simply plan to advance with their pursuit of heavy-handed government edicts.
Posted by Doug Busselman at 8/8/2011 4:34 PM 
Categories: Agriculture
Tags: Command and Control Government Regulations Federal Bureaucracy Farm Equipment Highways
Categories: Agriculture
Tags: Command and Control Government Regulations Federal Bureaucracy Farm Equipment Highways
Doug, I agree with your point that farm tractors should not need to be licensed, though states should be asked to require tractor operators to take safety training. Kind of like the way forklift operators can earn certification. Your attempt to paint Obama's administration as some kind of sinister coordinator of invasion of privacy and socialism is absurd in light of Dubya's far reaching Patriot Act.
Reply to this