Big Dogs House

Where Is OSHA For Border Patrol Agents?

May 1, 2009 Political

I have stated several times that I think the whole swine flu issue is being blown out of proportion but that does not mean there is no threat of getting sick from the virus especially if one visits Mexico or has contact with someone who did. There is still a need to protect ourselves and the most efficient way of doing this is to wash our hands often.

Another method, for those who have constant contact, is to wear masks. The masks, if properly worn, prevent airborne droplets from being inspired and causing infection.

However, Janet Napolitano and the DHS have decided that border patrol agents who are in contact with people crossing the Mexican/American border every day are not allowed to wear masks and if they do they will face disciplinary action. An ABC News 10 report indicates that border patrol agents have requested to wear a mask while performing her duties and this request was denied. Over 80 agents asked to wear the masks but they were told they may not. ABC News 10 reports they have copies of the denied requests and those copies indicate that the agents may not wear the masks because of how it looks and because of the potential for public panic.

The DHS is putting politics ahead of the safety of the workers.

The DHS denies that it ever told agents that they may not wear the masks which directly contradicts the report from ABC News 10 and the memos presented in the report. DHS states that the science does not indicate that wearing the masks is appropriate.

Employers are required to provide respiratory protective equipment when required by the work environment (OSHA 29 CFR 1910.134):

A respirator shall be provided to each employee when such equipment is necessary to protect the health of such employee. The employer shall provide the respirators which are applicable and suitable for the purpose intended. The employer shall be responsible for the establishment and maintenance of a respiratory protection program, which shall include the requirements outlined in paragraph (c) of this section. The program shall cover each employee required by this section to use a respirator.

The employer must provide it when the equipment is necessary to protect the health of the employee. DHS is getting around this by stating that the science does not support the wear of a mask (which is a respirator under the standard).

Has the DHS done any air monitoring to determine the potential for contamination? The outbreak started in Mexico and that country has been the hardest hit. People in Mexico are wearing masks to prevent spread of the disease and a lot of them cross the border each day. In the absence of monitoring data the atmosphere becomes and unknown and it makes sense to protect workers from the potential of exposure to a flu that will take them from their duties.

Does it make sense to make a politically correct decision and risk a large number of workers becoming ill and therefore unable to do their jobs?

The masks are inexpensive and the Mexicans are already wearing them so it is not like they don’t know what is going on. The idea that DHS is creating an atmosphere where its workers are potentially exposed to a virus that leads to illness is unconscionable. The CDC discusses the use of masks in settings where contact with potentially infected persons cannot be avoided (such as on the border with the country where it originated):

When crowded settings or close contact with others cannot be avoided, the use of facemasks1 or respirators2 in areas where transmission of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus has been confirmed should be considered as follows:

1. Whenever possible, rather than relying on the use of facemasks or respirators, close contact with people who might be ill and being in crowded settings should be avoided.
2. Facemasks should be considered for use by individuals who enter crowded settings, both to protect their nose and mouth from other people’s coughs and to reduce the wearers’ likelihood of coughing on others; the time spent in crowded settings should be as short as possible.
3. Respirators should be considered for use by individuals for whom close contact with an infectious person is unavoidable. This can include selected individuals who must care for a sick person (e.g., family member with a respiratory infection) at home.

The masks might help even if the science does not indicate they should be used. More importantly, the employees want to wear them. If wearing them will give them peace of mind and allow them to do their jobs more efficiently, why not let them?

There is no reason and no excuse for denying employees a method to protect themselves from infection.

Share on Facebook

Tags: border patrol, dhs, infection, masks, swine flu

We Need A Flu To Close The Border?

Apr 28, 2009 General, Immigration, Political

I have been wondering what the open borders crowd is saying now that swine flu is affecting a few folks and it seems to be heavily concentrated in Mexico. You see, all the ILLEGALS who walk across our border could be sick with about any disease and no one would know. They did not have to prove they were healthy to get here, they just walked in. There were cases of TB being brought in and now there is a good possibility that any ILLEGAL showing up in the US will be carrying the swine flu and that it will be transmitted to Americans.

I am not saying that we should be all worried about the flu, not yet anyway, but this is a clear example of how ILLEGAL immigration can harm us.

We have been calling for the border to be closed for a long time. Ted Kennedy pushed for amnesty two times in the past and each time he promised that ILLEGAL immigration would stop and we would not need another amnesty. He was part of the crowd that tried to pass amnesty last year

Now, a Democrat from New York is calling for the border between Mexico and the US to be closed during the flu outbreak.

Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) said the border should be closed until the threat is resolved.

“The public needs to be aware of the serious threat of swine flu, and we need to close our borders to Mexico immediately and completely until this is resolved,” Massa said in a statement.

“I am making this announcement because I see this as a serious threat to the health of the American public and I do not believe this issue is receiving the attention it needs to have in the news,” Massa said. The Hill

He is only half right. We need to close the border but we do not need to reopen it except at designated crossings where border patrol agents are stationed. We need to shut down the border NOW and we need to keep it shut down because swine flu is not the only thing ILLEGALS can bring into this country. They can bring in TB, AIDS, hepatitis, and any number of pathogens that can do us harm.

And yes, I know these diseases exist without the ILLEGALS but ILLEGALS live in the shadows which means they are less likely to be treated. This means more diseases being spread.

It should not take a flu outbreak to get our government to do its job and secure our borders.

Share on Facebook

Tags: border closing, border patrol, illegal immigrants, swine flu

Looking At Presidential Pardons

Nov 25, 2008 Political

Presidents have the authority, under the Constitution, to grant pardons and their decision to do so is absolute so no one can overturn them. Clinton pardoned a number of people and in the flurry of activity during his last day in office he granted a pardon to Marc Rich. That was a bought and paid for pardon but it cannot be overturned. Charges could have been brought against Clinton if it could be proven that he was paid for the pardon. Clinton also pardoned members of the FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group. One of Obama’s nominees had a little something to do with the Clinton pardons…

President Bush has been stingy with the pardon pen and has issued about half of those Reagan or Clinton issued. This past week President Bush issued pardons or sentence commutations to 16 people. Some of them are for people who were involved in drugs (either smuggling or using) and others were for a variety of crimes, none of them appear to be for people who committed violent crimes. There are two pardons that are missing and should have been made a long time ago.

Border agents Compean and Ramos, who were convicted of shooting a drug smuggler, still sit in jail while Bush pardons drug smugglers and users. These two border patrol agents were doing their jobs and shot the man in the line of duty and they ended up in jail while the US government granted immunity to the smuggler so he could testify (and we paid for his medical treatment).

The idea that two men who risked their lives in an attempt to keep our borders secure and our country free from the drugs that are smuggled in could end up in jail is mind boggling. What is even more a miscarriage of justice is that the president has yet to right this wrong by pardoning these men and returning them to their families where they belong. We need more of these kinds of people guarding our borders because God knows the Congress has no intention of doing it. The only mistake these two made was they did not kill the guy when they shot him. Then there would only be one story to worry about.

George Bush needs to pardon these men right away.

There are folks who have requested pardons or to have their sentences reduced. Two prominent ones are Randy Cunningham, a Republican California Congressman and Edwin W. Edwards, former Democratic Governor of Louisiana. Both were sent to jail after being convicted for corruption while in office.

These are two people who should not receive a pardon or shortened sentences. They used their office for personal gain and they violated the public trust. What they did is inexcusable and they should have to serve every day of their respective sentences. Every politician who is convicted of corruption should be put away for a very long time as a deterrent to others in office.

What kind of country is this where politicians who abused their offices expect to get pardoned while border guards who actually did their jobs are ignored?

There is also concern that Bush will issue a blanket pardon to everyone associated with him so that they cannot be prosecuted when the Democrats start their witch hunt. I have no problem with this. The Democrats have no reason to go after people and only want to try and dig up any little thing in order to embarrass the president and those who worked for him.

We can’t get these idiots to work full time as it is so they need to focus on the important things. If Bush issues the blanket pardon it will take away the distraction and allow the Democrats to work on more pressing issues.

But, if they go after Bush and those who worked for him they should keep in mind that they will not always be in power. Pay back can be a son of a gun.

Source:
Times Online UK

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.

Share on Facebook

Tags: border patrol, Bush, Clinton, controversy, pardon, reagan