Too often, the only security regulators provide is a false one
If you haven’t read the investigative piece about day-care safety reports hidden from the public, printed in Sunday’s AJC and available online, you really should do so. Among other things, it’s a reminder that government oversight of an industry often creates nothing more than a false sense of security for that industry’s customers.
Day cares in Georgia (and most other states, I’d be willing to bet) must have a state-issued license in order to operate. It has to be renewed annually. A parents might inspect the day care personally before enrolling Junior there. But it would be typical, and reasonable, for a parent to assume the day care meets certain minimum standards if its license was granted and later renewed.
Instead, the AJC investigation found, more than a third of the day cares in Georgia had been deemed — by state regulators — out of compliance with state health and safety standards at least once in the past four years. The vast majority of them, even those with multiple years of non-compliance, were allowed to stay open.
Yet, the state did not publicly release the reports detailing these businesses’ shortcomings. (The AJC obtained them through an open records request.)
While some of these failures might be on minor points, some of them seem pretty major to this parent, including failure by some day cares to run background checks on people before hiring them. That’s a pretty basic thing: Even my relatively small church runs background checks before letting parents volunteer in the children’s ministry.
So, the state requires a license for a day care to operate and checks up on day cares to make sure they are complying with state laws — but then doesn’t close down the worst offenders and doesn’t tell parents about the problems so that they can decide for themselves.
That’s the same kind of false security that played out in the recent financial meltdown. One doesn’t have to get into the merits of repealing Glass-Steagall restrictions or passing the Community Reinvestment Act to recognize that banks’ risk was artificially and irresonsibly heightened because of faulty ratings of the mortgage-backed securities and a flawed international regulatory regime (Basel II), which not only allowed but incentivized banks to load up on these riskier-than-believed investments.
The old line still applies: Caveat emptor. And you’ll be more likely to follow it if you also heed the warning against believing government can regulate and monitor the risks or problems out of life.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
209 comments Add your comment
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
3:47 pm
HDB…false statement on the military when you said “Neocons didn’t serve in the military.” My son served in the military for 15 years (mostly in Germany), just like his father and grandfather served in the military.
The pastor of my church, a very conservative man, has two sons currently serving in the military, one in the USA and one in Afghanistan. There are two others from my church who are serving in the miitary in Afghanistan. I doubt that they are liberals. All are not officers, including one who is a Marine.
Don't Tread
January 23rd, 2012
3:48 pm
I see we’re back to “It’s Bush’s fault”…
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
3:49 pm
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
3:40 pm
HDB,
“Good comeback on the “tractor”. But the tractor aint no regulation and it aint cheap, my friend.”
It’s the market reaction to regulation…..it’s called INNOVATION!! Americans used to PRIDE themselves in the fact that they were the most innovatove group of people on the earth!! The more people that buy the innovation, the cost DECLINES….and MORE go back to work to invoke the innovation!!
THAT’S what we used to do….what don’t we do it again???
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
3:51 pm
The EPA is finally getting ready to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas attributed to the world-wide global warming, by reducing it & eventually eliminating it from more common sources. Products that will be effected will include all soft drinks in bottles, cans & soda fountains. Beer, sparkling wine, tonic & soda water will be included. Yeast, baking powder & decaffeinated coffee will be restricted. The ban will affect compressed gas for airguns, paintball markers & inflating bicycle tires. Fire extinguishers, dry cleaning, refrigerants, swimming pools & submarines will be replaced.
Inside Out
January 23rd, 2012
3:51 pm
Somewhere….Check your facts…
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120120/NEWS0107/201200333/
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
3:52 pm
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
3:47 pm
There’s a difference between some conservatives and the “neo-cons” of the Bush/Cheney ilk (whom I was referring to….the “chickenhawks”)!
I served, my son served….and my daughter -in-law is serving….
Inside Out
January 23rd, 2012
3:55 pm
OK Dusty,
My dad, one of my brothers, and one sister served with honor and valor..I have Twin nephews that are currently in Turkey and another on the USS Esienhower right now.. all are Demacrats…Whats your point????
clyde
January 23rd, 2012
3:57 pm
Linda– You forgot trees.They are to be eliminated immediately.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
3:59 pm
Right HDB
Americans are filled with innovations due to the freedom of mind and personality here. But Americans are saddled with heavy regulations that kill innovations.
The forecast with Democrats in charge is MORE regulations. Every “risk of life” must immediately call for more regulations. No improvement. No compaction. No understanding. Just lay on the regulations and the expenses that go with it.
Moderation is needed in this process. Democrats seem unable to modify or reduce.
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
4:00 pm
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
3:51 pm
There are other options in certain areas for CO2…
1) compressed gas for airguns, paintball markers & inflating bicycle tires.: compressed nitrogen is already being used by the airlines; this is commercially feasible
2) Beer, sparkling wine, tonic & soda water will be included: Yeast, baking powder & decaffeinated coffee: Yeast naturally generated carbonic acid in the fermentation process; wine also uses nitrites for preservation. Corporate America will get grandfathered in…….
3) Fire extinguishers, dry cleaning, refrigerants, swimming pools & submarines will be replaced:
Halon is already nitrogen-based – fire extinguishers
Swimming pools are both chlorinated and nitrogenated
Refrigerants are converting now to non-chlorine-based….not carbon based refrigerants…primarily nitrogen…..
The Navy is already experimenting with nitrogen in ballast tanks…..
Industry CAN adapt……………
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
4:00 pm
“The stimulus wasn’t ENOUGH…that was the problem!!
You’ve lost any and all credibility with that lie.
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
4:03 pm
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
3:59 pm
When the government placed restrictions on coal-burning plants, didn’t the industry adapt by devising scrubbers to remove the sulfur content of the exhaust? Didn’t the industry devise a methodology for cleaner burning coal?? The regulations brought forth the innovation…..
Some regulations are onerous….and need to be checked; no regulations would make the US look like the Mexican border…and look at the environmenta; damage down there!!
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
4:04 pm
Have a good day, all……gone!!
HDB
January 23rd, 2012
4:06 pm
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
4:00 pm
It WASN’T!! If we had properly stimulated the economy with infrastructure repairs (to start), how many MORE people would have been working?? Rewiring the nation would have put more engineers back to work……
If we could envision putting men on the moon…why can we envision rebuilding our NATION???
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
4:08 pm
Inside out, @3:55
My point about the military was this: HDB said that “no neocons served in Afghanistan”. I proved him wrong. Did you miss that?
Cheers for you family serving in the military in Afghanistan or anywhere..
I hope this answers your question.
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
4:10 pm
HDB
Give it up. You have absolutely ZERO credibility here. Even the Democrats run from that word and NO ONE even talks about it anymore.
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
4:10 pm
“all are Demacrats”
And no one cares.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
4:12 pm
So long, HDB
You simply looked over the word “moderation” mentioned by so many conservatives. That is what we meant and said. Moderation! Got it?
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
4:14 pm
HDB@3:45, My question was very simple: Name ONE MONTH in which the unemployment rate has been lower during the last THREE YEARS under Obama than it was during the entire EIGHT YEARS under Bush.
This Blame Bush strategy might have worked for a while, but it’s old. If Obama is re-elected & the unemployment rate remains high, how many more years will you continue to blame Bush? When will the economy belong to Obama? I couldn’t help but notice that you are trying to simultaneously blame Bush AND give credit to Obama. Which is it?
Obama said that if he & the Dems. spent almost $1 T in 2/09, that the unemployment rate would not exceed 8%. Well, the $1 T is gone & the unemployment rate exceeded 10%. You are blaming Bush for the unemployment rate exceeding 10% & giving Obama credit for its current unacceptable
rate of 8.5%.
If there were Bush policies “enacted up to 36 mts. prior” to Mar.-Oct./09 that caused the high unemployment rate, please share with us what they were.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2012
4:24 pm
Dusty @2:31 pm
Oh Dusty, you should know better than this. Will you complain again about “semantics?” When you respond to what somebody else has written, should you not quote accurately, rather than change the meaning? I did not ask Kyle about “the risk of life,” and Kyle did not write that regulations cannot cover “risks of life.” What Kyle wrote was the following, as you can check: “Caveat emptor. And you’ll be more likely to follow it if you also heed the warning against believing government can regulate and monitor the risks or problems out of life.”
Kyle was arguing that government cannot regulate risk or problems OUT OF LIFE. (My emphasis) In other words, to make life without risks or problems. Which is what I commented about. He showed some cases where regulations were wrong (I did not ckeck that, but took it as correct for the sake of argument), and then made a sweeping generalization, warning that regulations cannot make life without risk or problems. Which nobody argued they can. A straw man argument.
I would be guilty of the same if I showed you a few regulations that do lessen risks – and there are many, which I hope you will not deny – and then generalize that it means that the regulations can remove ALL risks.
I think any rational person will agree that some regulations are good and some are bad. Self-regulation works only so far.
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
4:26 pm
HDB@4:00, You are living proof that liberals will believe anything as long as Obama says it’s so. If Obama told Government Motors to remove floorboards from cars so we could propel them with our feet, would your answer be, “Industry CAN adapt?”
P.S. Obama thinks wrestling is real & a great “sport.”
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
4:30 pm
clyde@3:37, Trees might have given me away.
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
4:34 pm
” You are living proof that liberals will believe anything as long as Obama says it’s so.
Yep.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 23rd, 2012
4:52 pm
Who’s keeping an eye on the government?
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
5:12 pm
Just wondering…Did any of you read Maureen Dowd’s column in Sunday’s AJC?
Now most of you probably know that Dowd is an avid Democrat who would have liked to burn Bush at the stake and all Republicans with him. But here are some of her surprising words on President Obama.
“Times have been bad and sad, and The One (Obama) did not turn out to be a messiah, just a mortal politician who ruefully jokes that his talent is hitting the ’sweet spot’ where he makes no one happy, neither allies nor opponents.”
Dowd goes on to say that Obama feels the press thinks he is cool and aloof.
Quoting Jodie Kantor’s book “The Obamas”, Dowd wrote “Despite what his rivals say, the president and first lady ……”feel over assaulted and underappreciated.. We disappoint them”.
Then Dowd said referring to the Obamas: “They still believed, as their friend Valerie Jarrett, once said ‘ that Obama was just too talented to do what ordinary people do’.”
In Kantor’s book, she writes: ” that the Obamas feel “misunderstood, burrowed into ’self imposed exile, ……………..with their small circle of Chicago friends who reinforced the idea that ‘the American public just did not appreciate their exceptional leader’.
Dowd notes that neither Pres. Carter nor Pres. Clinton have been invited to dinner within the private residence.
Then she writes” The Obamas , especially Michelle, have radiated the sense that Americans do not appreciate what they sacrifice by living in a gilded cage.”
I find it pretty amazing. First, that a dedicated Democratic journalist like Dowd would declare the Obamas in this manner. Second, to see that the Obamas are obviously unhappy in their leadership role is so revealing. Just supports the belief of many Americans that we elected a man totally unsuited or qualified for the presidency..
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 23rd, 2012
5:25 pm
Mitt’s strategy for 2012 as for 2008 was to sit on his lead and run out the clock: Four years ago, that strategy died in New Hampshire; this time round it died one state later. Congratulations!
If Plastic Man keeps at it, he should have enough delegates to win the nomination by 2112.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
5:33 pm
MarkV
You will have to show me where I said that “all regulations should be removed”. I made a point of explaining why regulations could NOT remove all ” risks of life” even listing what I considered “risks of life”. I was agreeing with Kyle who said “Caveat emptor” (beware of the buyer) which meant to me that we should be aware that regulations cannot remove all the risks of life.
I also promoted “moderation” in many posts here this afternoon.
Maybe I miunderstood Kyle or you misunderstood what I wrote. Either way, I prefer moderation in most things including regulations. Moderate to me means a sensible compromise in the middle. which does not mean total removal.
Hope this helps in some way.
Cobbian
January 23rd, 2012
5:43 pm
What I get from the article is that we need to pressure the state government to publish inspection reports. The problem is not that inspections are not effective. The problem is that they are secret. Let the public know and then the day care centers face consequences.
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
5:46 pm
The rumor is out that Obama might change his mind on approving the Keystone Pipeline. It seems that the Canadian govt. has agreed to allow the pipeline to include solar panels & windmills flowing thru it, in addition to the black crude, on the days of the month in which there will be full moons those same nights. Now, Obama will be able to appease both his bases, the kooks (radical environmentalists) & the thugs (unions).
Michael H. Smith
January 23rd, 2012
5:54 pm
Oopsy…
faulty“fraudulent” ratings. There Kyle, I fixed it for you.MarkV
January 23rd, 2012
5:59 pm
Dusty @5:33 pm
Dusty,
I do not think anything can be gained by arguing this point, because both of us are in general agreement, preferring moderation. It just confusing when you seem to read things that do not exist in my posts. You have now written the following: You will have to show me where I said that “all regulations should be removed”. The quotations are supposed to indicate a quote. Where did you find in my post that you said that “all regulations should be removed?”
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
6:10 pm
HDB: Question: Are not conservatives for the elimination of the EPA and environmental regulations…particularly dealing with the oil industry?
———————————–
No. Prove me wrong.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
6:13 pm
HDB probably thinks Government Motors paid back every taxpayer dollar–Obozo said it, so it must be true!
MarkV
January 23rd, 2012
6:33 pm
Dusty @5:12 pm
Dusty,
You devoted so much time to write this gossip? And even if all of it were true, do you seriously believe that those things you cited make a man “totally unsuited or qualified for the presidency?”
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
6:51 pm
Dusty, I warned you. Just tell him you know he’s a progressive & you think progressives aren’t good for the country. He’s manipulative & he’s learning you aren’t manipulable. He’ll call you every name from the pre-school playground & then leave you alone to be free to promote the conservative agenda, in hopes of preventing the economy from totally tanking.
MarkV
January 23rd, 2012
6:56 pm
Dusty,
I have to go now. I will look forward to your posts. Just be sure to use appropriate label!
saywhat?
January 23rd, 2012
6:58 pm
Somewhere over there
January 23rd, 2012
3:36 pm
“GM sales are waaaaaaaaaaay down. If you’re lumping Ford in with your question, Ford didn’t take the bailout money from Obama.”
Ummmmmm. Not so much
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/06/world%E2%80%99s-largest-automakers-of-2011-projected-gm-wins-toyota-takes-3rd/
If you have this little knowledge about the auto industry, it certainly explains your complete lack of knowledge on just about everything else you spew. One could have a more informative discussion with a head of lettuce.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
7:21 pm
Mark V
‘Tis true. I put in quotations what I thought you said or meant. Did you not mean that I said that all regulations should be removed?
I give you my opinion. You are correct in saying everything should be based on exact quotations to be more accurate. Of course, I am just giving you my opinion of what I read when I read it. It is a very accurate writing of my opinion.
As to the gossip, could be. But it seems to be the opinion of several people in contact with the president and the first lady. To be reported by a loyal liberal is even more surprising. It is like Bookman coming out and saying something deleterious to Obama. It just isn’t done.
I have long felt that Obama was not suitable for the presidency based on his short experience in politics, his infamous friends who aided his rise to fame, his wife’s original opinion of the USA and 20 years of listening to a minister who damned this country.
Obama was an excellent orator in the last race. That is his talent as far as I can see besides the fact that he is a good father. Those are good abilities but not enough to be president.
So reading Dowd’s piece just added to my conclusion that Obama was not suitable for the presidency. His first three years certainly did little to change my opinion.
Dusty
January 23rd, 2012
7:32 pm
Dear Linda,
MarkV is a determined Democrat and presents his case. I believe he is honest in his convictions.
Well, I am honest too. I don’t mind hearing from him. An honest liberal is the best kind. They put their cards on the table. Then we can all play at convincing each other, the essential political game.
Always good to hear from you. You present a strong case. That’s always a wise move.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
7:34 pm
saywhat?: If you have this little knowledge about the auto industry, it certainly explains your complete lack of knowledge on just about everything else you spew.
———————————-
GM sold 5 million vehicles in the US in 1999, and 2.5 million last year.
Oopsies.
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
7:47 pm
Dusty, Even Dems. don’t know who progressives are & have no idea how their party has been infiltrated by them. There are progressives in the Republican party, but the progressive caucus is made up of all Dems. Do your own research & make up your own mind. They are a breed of their own.
There is no longer a clear distinction among voters. There’s always been Dems., Reps. & Independents. There’s liberals & conservatives. There’s Blue Dog Dems. & RINOS. But it’s the progressives who we need to be completely alarmed with.
I didn’t even know what a progressive was until the last 2 or 3 yrs. I am absolutely appalled at who they are & what they are up to. They’ve been around for decades & it’s unbelievable what damage they have done to our schools/children, our economy & our freedom.
Rafe Hollister
January 23rd, 2012
7:50 pm
Dusty
Maureen Dowd is a devoted liberal who would stand in a long line in the rain while having a fever, to vote for her Utopian messiah. She wrote that article in an effort to try and convince herself that she is somewhat objective.
@@
January 23rd, 2012
8:01 pm
There’s a lot to be said for the old adage…”If you want something done right, do it yourself.”
Rafe Hollister
January 23rd, 2012
8:05 pm
Correction Maureen Dowd is a progressive.
Linda, since liberal has become such an epithet, most libs now call themselves a progressive. I am with you, that I do not think most know what a Woodrow Wilson progressive really is. Those that do, like Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Barry Oblamer, etc are far to the left of the common everyday utopian bed wetting liberal.
saywhat?
January 23rd, 2012
8:15 pm
Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
7:34 pm
GM sold 5 million vehicles in the US in 1999, and 2.5 million last year.
Oopsies.
___________________________
Irrelevant. Worldwide sales for GM were over 9 million in 2011, the most of any auto manufacturer that year. GM previously sold slightly more in the years 2005-2007, with a peak in 2007 of 9.37 million. The difference this past year is that GM was profitable, where as in those previous years, they were not.
http://www.autozine.org/Manufacturer/USA/GM.html
Oopsies. You and somewhere can go back to your coloring books now.
Rafe Hollister
January 23rd, 2012
8:22 pm
The difference this past year is that GM was profitable, where as in those previous years, they were not.
____________________________________________________________
Kinda helps the ole bottom line if you don’t worry about paying off your new debts and bankrupt your old debts.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
January 23rd, 2012
8:34 pm
People don’t understand how the price of fuel affects everything that they pay for, from food to any good that they get. But the bottom line is that this man, because of what I can clearly see as politics to support these environmental people, he is willing to destroy this country, destroy the economy, it’s a no-brainer in terms of getting away from dependence on the foreigners, foreign oil. And I just cannot in good conscience continue to hurt my family in the amount that I’m paying for fuel, groceries, and everything else. I cannot in good conscience support this man when this is obviously political because it would have helped this country and the economy. So I want to say that I’m finally seeing the light and I’m done with him.
What took you so long to figure this out, man?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
8:53 pm
saywhat?: Irrelevant…GM previously sold slightly more in the years 2005-2007, with a peak in 2007 of 9.37 million. The difference this past year is that GM was profitable.
————–
Totally relevant, since you claimed earlier that GM sales weren’t down. They are.
Oopsies.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
January 23rd, 2012
8:54 pm
Oh, and GM is “profitable” because Obozo changed the law just for them so they could carry forward and deduct $45 billion in previous losses.
Oopsies, part deux.
Linda
January 23rd, 2012
9:53 pm
saywhat@8:15, I find it hilarious that liberals try to defend mock profits by Government Motors & condemn real profits by other corporations, especially a corporation run by Romney.