We are concerned, not only about the substantial loss of business to us, but also the loss of jobs among thousands of mechanics who install such products.
One must keep in mind that certain of the above products are consumer oriented....A Warning label would be a substantial and unnecessary deterrent to the sale of these products. Since these products are not hazardous under any conditions, they should not be labeled as such. Their demise would mean the abolition of thousands of jobs at the manufacturing, distribution, contractor, and retailer levels.
A two fiber standard would require that GAF reconsider the economic feasibility of continued operation....These plants provide the livelihood for more than 4,000 employees. There is little, if any, medical evidence to support a two fiber standard.
If you people ban the use of endrin [see below] until we know a lot more about it then we do now, many orchards will simply go out of production.
But where will employers obtain the money to pay for that increase? It is unrealistic to assume that somehow the increase will be squeezed out of profits….In plain fact, the burden of an increased minimum wage will fall heavily on those least able to bear it. The fringe employers, the unskilled worker, the young and the handicapped are those who will be priced out of the job market.
[It would not be possible] to achieve the control levels specified in the bill . . .[M]anufacturers . . . would be forced to shut down.
[T]his bill could prevent continued production of automobiles . . . [and] is a threat to the entire American economy and to every person in America.
The general public wants both blue water in the streams and adequate employment for the community. The older plant may not be able to afford the investment in waste treatment facilities necessary to provide blue water; the only alternative may be to shut the operation down. But the employees of the plant and the community cannot afford to have the plant shut down. They cannot afford to lose the employment furnished by the operation.
Millions of women will get pay raises over the next years, but countless others are in danger of losing their jobs.
[While the] bill may have motives in the finest traditions of gallantry, it actually is about as ungallant as a kick in the shins. [These costs arise] from the indisputable fact that women are more prone to housemaking and motherhood than men.
