By Jonathan Walters

When it comes to unenlightened self-interest, it’s been a dubious two months for local government.

First there was the general sense of euphoria among local governments last October, when President Clinton signed the fabulous-sounding “Truth in Regulating Act.” Under TIRA, Congress is handing over to the General Accounting Office the authority and resources to do detailed, independent assessments of the cost of new regulations ginned up by federal agencies, versus the benefits the new regulations are supposed to deliver. Because these include regulations that impact both the private sector and local government, groups like the National League of Cities found themselves allied with outfits like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in support of the bill.

Nobody would argue that federal agencies shouldn’t be judicious in their regulatory policies. But local governments, for their part, might want to count to three before they start thinking in lockstep with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization not well known for deeply sympathetic views of government at any level.

Which is why what happened shortly after that tryst might serve local governments right. Just about a month after signing TIRA, President Clinton went from regulatory hero to zero by approving a final federal rule aimed at preventing repetitive stress injuries in the workplace. Again, local government interests allied themselves with the business community — this time to howl their objections. A headline in the NLC weekly newspaper decried the new rule as a “threat to cities.”

The nature of the threat: Among other onerous requirements of the rule, according to the League, cities, as employers, will have to teach employees about repetitive stress injuries and how to report them. Cities will have to cover the cost of treating repetitive stress injuries, and “they will also have to work at eliminating or lessening any workplace hazards that cause problems.”

Now one thing groups like the NLC are good at is pointing out the hypocrisy of the federal government. In fact, it’s reflexive. The feds say they’re going to stop their aggravated regulating, and a month later they’re dropping a doozy on local government. And so NLC starts spitting fire about the big, bad, hypocritical federal government. Except in this case, the reflex bypassed the brain. The feds aren’t asking local government to give every public employee a week’s paid vacation at the spa of their choice. The feds are asking local governments (and businesses) to extend common-sense protection to the folks on the front lines doing the heavy lifting.

But it’s clear how NLC stumbled into as embarrassing a public position as claiming that “eliminating or lessening workplace hazards” represents an onerous, odious mandate from the mean old federal government: Local government officials have been spending too much time in Chamber of Commerce board rooms strategizing on battling federal regulations, and not enough time with the gang down at the department of public works talking about shoulder injuries. While local governments do have legitimate interests that are frequently trammeled by the feds, local government does ultimately serve the public interest, including the public that works for them.

Jonathan Walters is a staff correspondent for Governing.

Agree? Disagree? Want to expand on a point? E-mail us at mailbox@governing.com, and we'll post your comments here. Please include your name, location, government or business title or job description, and a daytime phone number (for verification purposes).

Recently in View:

Jurist Imprudence: the political impact of the Florida election mess on state courts (posted November 28, 2000)

Of Ding Dongs and Raw Eggs: food safety and the taste of flexibility (posted November 21, 2000)

Holy Land: political pandering and organized religion (posted November 15, 2000)

Sprawl Around the Corner: to the voters, it’s a local issue (posted November 9, 2000)

The Ugly Dot-Com Duckling: not all high-tech development is created equal (posted October 31, 2000)

Complete index of previous columns

Copyright © 2000, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.