by Scott McClallen
A Michigan bill aims to make it easier for state agencies to adopt or promulgate rules more stringent than federal standards.
Bill sponsor Sen. Sean McCann, D-Kalamazoo, said Senate Bill 14 aims to repeal the no stricter than federal law signed into law in 2018. The law prohibited state agencies from setting rules more stringent than federal law, in most cases.
“Currently, under this law, Michigan can only exceed federal regulation in an emergency or if a state agency director finds a clear and convincing need – a process that can take time that many environmental and public health hazards cannot afford,” McCann said in committee testimony last week.
The current law specifies that the restrictions above don’t apply to the special education programs and services rules; however, they do apply to the promulgation of new rules relating to special education with the rescission of current rules.
McCann said that federal guidelines are meant to be the lowest standard that states can meet, and said Michigan needs rules unique to its problems.
For example, McCann cited a chemical spill from a Wixom-based chrome plating facility last summer that resulted in a prolonged “don’t touch” advisory in the Huron River due to the presence of chromium and its more toxic variant, hexavalent chromium, as a reason to enact the bill into law.
Charlotte Jameson, chief policy officer at The Michigan Environmental Council, said her group supports the bill.
“The Great Lakes State should not rely on a one-size-fits-all standard that only provides minimum protections for land, air, water, and public health,” Jameson said.
Jameson said the law created a “chilling effect” on state regulatory agencies that promulgate rules.
“Agencies are wary of a proliferation of lawsuits and higher litigation costs for Michigan, so they avoid looking to rule promulgation as an opportunity to put in place protections,” Jameson said.
Jameson added that the state should make more stringent rules for air pollution and wetland protection.
Caroline Liethen, director of Environmental and Regulatory Policy at the Michigan Manufacturers Association, opposes the bill.
Liethen said the MMA represents 1,700 companies statewide that could be hurt if this bill was enacted into law.
“Manufacturing is different than other sectors of the economy in that we don’t compete with companies down the street or county over – we compete with the lowest priced location anywhere in the world,” Liethen said.
Liethen said the cost of doing business in Michigan is already higher than in other states, and this bill could increase the cost if enacted into law.
“At a minimum, we need to be able to compete based on price with companies in other states,” Liethen said. “Michigan companies will not survive, or will move to a location where they can compete on price.”
– – –
Scott McClallen is a staff writer covering Michigan and Minnesota for The Center Square. A graduate of Hillsdale College, his work has appeared on Forbes.com and FEE.org. Previously, he worked as a financial analyst at Pepsi.
Bad move. Agencies who are not accountable to voters should be narrowly limited in their authority to write rules in any case. Too much runaway government as it is.