Taking Candy from an Industry





Legislators in Minnesota are trying to follow the lead of 26 states and create a no-call list for telemarketers. Under this plan, a person would be able to add his or her name to a list and it would be illegal for telemarketers to call that person. Unfortunately, there is a group trying to stop the attempt. The group? The telemarketing industry. They claim a no-call list would cause massive job losses.

That's really interesting. Of course, the first interesting part is an industry concerned about people going jobless. All one has to do is check the newspapers from the last few, say, DECADES to see large numbers of firings, layoffs, downsizing, restructuring, etc. Job cuts have been going on for so long that they have euphemisms for their euphemisms. Now, suddenly, business people are claiming loyalty to their employees? Yeah, I believe that one.

Unfortunately, the Born Yesterday Party seems to be in the majority in our government because the legislators often buy that argument.

The second interesting part of the telemarketing industry's claim is that it assumes that there would be a huge number of people requesting to be put on that list. (Otherwise, there'd be no reason to downsize the call-making workforce.) Seems a bit of no-brainer. Who wouldn't put their name on that list? What makes it interesting is that their claim is essentially a confession that they are calling thousands (millions?) of people whom they know do not want to be called. Often, businesses will claim to be an asset to the community. That is not the case here. The telemarketing industry is saying "We're annoying and we're an intrusion in people's lives, but we don't care." It's amazing legislators actually listen to these self-acknowledged public nuisances. These people have no ethic judgment.

Speaking of ethical compass, how about drunk driving legislation? Attempts have been and are being made in Minnesota to lower the legal limit to 0.08 percent blood-alcohol level. Of course, the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association (MLBA) and the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association (MMBA) have claimed that this isn't fair. Go figure! The people who benefit most from excessive drinking don't want this law passed. But don't worry, I'm sure they have their customers' best interests in mind when they tell us we should be able to drink and drive. Remember when the alcohol industry pretended to be concerned about drunk driving? Well, I guess their true colors have shown through. (Is "puke" still a color?)

Then we have the airlines. They treated passengers so poorly that congress was looking into a passenger bill of rights. Rather than face the wrath of reform, the airlines took a different stance. "Let us direct the reform," they said. "We know what the passengers want!" Good one. So, even though you've never considered the passengers concerns before, we should put you in charge of creating a happy air-travel environment. Why wouldn't we believe that you'd enact real reform? Oh, yeah! Past performance.

THEN you have the auto industry. Several attempts have been made to require better gas mileage. The attempts have been thwarted. How? First, the old downsizing claim. Second, by the auto makers convincing the legislators that people do not want higher gas mileage. WHAT? Yeah, I'd much rather get ten miles to the gallon than, say, 200 miles per gallon. The claim works better because they spin it. What they're saying is that people don't want high gas mileage if it means sacrificing things like vehicle size and safety. That makes more sense, BUT they should be able to both increase mileage and keep safety intact.

Unfortunately, American businesspeople are slackers. They replaced the traditional gung-ho "Can do" attitude with a dreary-eyed "Nah. Not today." There is simply no ambition in America's business world. Anything requiring effort is quickly stamped with "get government off our back" and discarded as unnecessary.

These businesses have become infants who can't cross the street without their hands being held. They've become five-year-olds that throw temper tantrums in the grocery store when Mom won't buy them a treat.

Yet, our politicians look to these business leaders to shape policy. Maybe next we can let death row inmates shape prison security policies. Maybe we can let convicted thieves write trespassing laws. It doesn't make sense.

This is why I cringe when I hear people support deregulation. Deregulation isn't the way to go when the deregulated can't be trusted. And American businesses cannot be trusted. This is why we need to not only stop deregulation, but also increase regulations. Business isn't mature enough to handle the responsibility of being community leaders. They endanger themselves and the rest of the world.

Until American business demonstrates maturity, we shouldn't be spoiling them with special trips to the candy store.

Because not all of us are all-day suckers!


return to Commentary index

The opinions expressed here are solely those of the writer and do not neccessarily reflect those of the rest of the family.

mark@wentzmania.com.

© 2002, Mark Wentz