• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Regulation Happy in San Francsico

    San Francisco is leading the way for questionable cell phone regulations that will cause a cost and a headache for retailers around the city.

    The first ever cell phone radiation law recently took effect, and now the city is being sued on First Amendment grounds.

    The trade group behind the lawsuit represents cell phone manufacturers and service providers fed up with a requirement to display warnings about radiation coming from the phones and hand out fact sheets regarding exposure risks.

    The main problem? The medical risks associated with cell phone radiation are merely theories at this point. In reality, they’ve only been classified as a “possible risk” by the World Health Organization (WHO). According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), studies “have not shown a consistent link between cell phone use and cancers of the brain, nerves, or other tissues of the head or neck.” But regulation-happy Mayor Gavin Newsom doesn’t seem to care much about the facts.

    While San Francisco is the only city taking these precautions so far, other cities could follow suit and become paranoid about health risks as well. Jumping the gun on regulations—when there are already way too many holding businesses down—is the wrong way to go.

    As Heritage’s Diane Katz and James Gattuso wrote recently, “The regulatory burden on Americans has continued to increase during the first half of FY 2011, with $5.8 billion in new annual costs and $6.5 billion in one-time implementation costs.”

    These cell phone regulations may not cost billions, but they add to an already over-burdened economy. In addition to the NCI, the WHO and the International Agency for Research on Cancer have both said that there is no concrete evidence linking cell phone radiation to cancer. While they admit to a “positive association” between exposure to the agent and cancer, they also said that chance or bias “could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence.”

    Similar positive associations have also been identified between gasoline, coffee, and other elements. But you don’t see fact sheets and warning signs at gas stations and coffee shops.

    Nonetheless, San Francisco would rather err on the side of caution, which could be a disturbing trend line to start.

    According to the regulation paper work, the city of San Francisco relies on the Precautionary Principle, “which provides that the government should not wait for scientific proof of a health or safety risk before taking steps to inform the public of the potential for harm.”

    The Precautionary Principle is often used to justify needless regulations and leaves the door open for all kinds of open-ended regulation that could do significantly more damage. In implementing it, San Francisco is merely repeating the mistakes of many other government entities.

    Gattuso and Katz point out that in the past two years, the Obama Administration has imposed 75 new major regulations with a price tag of $38 billion.

    As red tape rises within every inch of our nation’s private industry, where will the government intrusion end? Until there’s a concrete reason to warn cell phone consumers of radiation risks, retailers definitely shouldn’t be forced to deal with these precautionary measures.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    9 Responses to Regulation Happy in San Francsico

    1. Will Ellingham says:

      Thought you were going to comment on the recent SF regulation that requires putting a towel on the chair should one decide to dine in a restaurant nude.

    2. Brad - Detroit says:

      Unintended consequences. That is all this really is. When you grow government to such a large and bureaucratic state, people run out of things to do. It is the same in very large corporations. In the desperate attempt to "matter", workers need to "do" something. So, you have agencies and departments coming up with regulations and rules such as this. No basis in real science, just government's cruel attempt at saving us from ourselves.

    3. R Holland says:

      The bigger the government the fewer the freedoms the greater the oppression.

    4. Karl Kling says:

      Next up for San Francisco: warning signs that alert you that sidewalks could cause tripping and falling.

    5. Leon says:

      lost my stuff again. These are not the Loyal Opposition. They are actually Traitors, they do not believe in America.

    6. Mort G. says:

      I would suggest that ALL of the cell phone providers stop sell phones in San Francisco. I addition, once current contracts expire, then shut down all service to the citizenry of S.F. It would be a good reminder to Mayor Newsome that "You can never do just one thing!".

    7. MIke Mancuso says:

      Many former San Francisco left wing politicians are now in state government. The plague continues and there aren't enough conservatives left in Southern California's Orange County to cure it.

    8. West Texan says:

      SF has continued down the merry path of mindless nonsense since the late 60s. It's funny how regressive communities promote social progressiveness .

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×