The Clean Air Act's Unduly stringent and extremely costly provisions could seriously threaten this nation's economic expansion.
The technology to meet these standards simply does not exist today…[and we predict] major supply disruptions.
Rather than merely prohibiting discrimination against the disabled, the bill compels employers to make significant expenditures and extensive physical alterations to their facilities to accommodate an unlimited variety job applicants.
The cost to the nation and the economy is going to be dramatic. This goes way beyond the bounds of reason.
Under the guise of civil rights for the disabled, the Senate had passed a disaster for U.S. business.
Since access would now be a civil right, moreover, the cost would not be relevant--even if that means eliminating bus service or closing down businesses that cannot afford either compliance or the legal expenses of defending themselves in court. In addition, the bill would also, for the first time, grant homosexuals the right to sue over discrimination.
The ADA also mandates job accommodation financed by employers. Employers will be forced to restructure existing facilities, restructure jobs, hire readers, signers, and assistants in order to accommodate over 900 physical and mental impairments. This converts a civil rights measure into a mandated benefits program for the disabled. It is time we ask ourselves what `reasonable accommodation' means for American businesses. The real cost to the nation would be higher costs of production, fewer jobs, lower real wage rates, lower levels of output and income, and a weaker competitive position for the U.S. business in the world market place.
It's just a bad piece of legislation…This continuous tendency to try to mandate benefit policy creates a bad business environment for Tennessee and the U.S. as a whole…[benefits] should be left up to the employers and employees to determine.
[Further decreasing auto emissions] is not feasible or necessary and that congressional dictates to do so would be financially ruinous.
In January 1990, the DuPont Company testified that accelerating the phase-out of ozone-depleting CFCs to July 1, 1996, would cause ‘severe economic and social disruption.’
