this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
523 points (95.3% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3677 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

House Bill 2127 pre-empts municipalities from enacting legislation in eight areas—with predictable results.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am vehemently opposed to this law. It is useless, dangerous bullshit, done only for political signalling.

However, this artcle is bullshit too, having absolutely nothing to do with the law, except for the headline.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Local ordinances mandating water breaks for workers outdoors, passed in Austin in 2010 and in Dallas in 2015, have contributed to a significant decrease in annual heat-related illnesses and heat deaths. Since 2011, annual workplace heat-related illness numbers have dropped by 78 percent, while workplace heat-related deaths have cut in half. San Antonio considered a similar ordinance before the Death Star zapped its chances.

In addition to overturning existing local ordinances, House Bill 2127 bans cities and counties from passing new ones at the risk of legal action. These include any bills concerning agriculture, finance, insurance, labor, natural resources, property, business and commerce, and occupations.

[...] come September 1, those water breaks in Dallas and Austin will no longer be mandatory. Some workers fear that bosses seeking to increase production will eliminate existing breaks.

Trying to understand how this has nothing to do with it?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How can people be dying now to something that comes into effect on September 1st?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I didn't say the headline was the best, I said the article discussed the topic at hand and provided examples with how.

The fact that people are ALREADY dying and this would LIMIT their MANDATED breaks, it goes to show this is very much a step in the wrong direction.

That's not even acknowledging the fact that all estimates indicate summers will only get more severe.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

I didn't say the headline was the best

Biggest understatement.

The headline implies that people died as a direct result of this legislation, when the law have even gone into effect and the deaths had absolutely nothing to do with the law.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

OK, they described the content and background of the law. But the article is about 11 deaths that are utterly unrelated to that law. And the headline is a salacious attempt to link the two.

Do you actually disagree with my point, or is this just useless pedantry?