HolyCoast: Liberals Finally Find a Regulatory Burden They Don't Like

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Liberals Finally Find a Regulatory Burden They Don't Like

They have no problems with imposing ridiculous environmental regulation on business, but try and impose a safety regulations on abortion clinics and they go nuts. From an editorial in the Washington Post:
IT’S ALREADY HARD to get an abortion in Virginia, and it’s about to get much harder.

The reason is a new set of regulations — absurdly onerous and utterly unnecessary — pushed by conservative ideologues in Richmond and adopted by the state Board of Health, which is dominated by appointees of Gov. Robert F. McDonnell (R). The regulations, which go into effect Jan. 1, are likely to result in the closure of many or most of Virginia’s 23 abortion clinics, which accounted for all but a few hundred of the 26,000 procedures performed in the state last year.

Republicans such as Mr. McDonnell and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II love to pummel what they see as the regulatory zeal of liberals. But in this instance they have outdone liberals in supporting the imposition of punitive and meddling rules under the pretext of protecting women’s health but without providing an iota of evidence that women were endangered to begin with. First-trimester abortions, which account for the overwhelming majority of procedures performed in the state, are extremely safe, requiring hospitalization for complications in only the rarest of instances.

The rules will require existing clinics to meet construction and design standards mainly intended for new hospitals — not existing outpatient facilities such as abortion clinics. The rules mandate the minimum width of hallways; ceiling height; the size of operating rooms; numbers of parking spots; and other requirements that will be physically impossible, or prohibitively expensive, for many clinics to satisfy. Mr. McDonnell can make changes to the board’s recommendations but is not expected to alter them significantly.

In nearly all past cases, the state differentiated between existing structures and newly built ones when imposing fresh building standards. In this instance — and without demonstrating any need related to patient care and safety, urgent or otherwise — that practice has been thrown out.
How's it feel, libs, to have regulatory power used against one of your sacred institutions?  I'm not a big fan of excessive regulation, but as long as liberals have no problem with it, why should we?

No comments: