The party of small/limited government wants you to pay a penalty should you not turn over your genetic "flaws" to your employer. It’s hard to imagine a more sensitive type of personal information than your own genetic blueprints. With varying degrees of accuracy, the four-base code can reveal bits of your family’s past, explain some of your current traits and health, and may provide a glimpse into your future with possible conditions and health problems you could face. And that information doesn’t just apply to you but potentially your blood relatives, too. New bill would let companies force workers to get genetic tests, share results
Do you have a source other than "ass-technica"? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Are the sponsors of the bill known to be small/limited government people, or are you just jumping to that conclusion based on a Republican stereotype? Seems most of the sponsors come from liberal areas, with those voters to appease.
Sponsors: Virginia Foxx (R-NC) - "When American workers and small businesses look to Washington for help, they aren’t asking for more micromanagement, a federal health care takeover or a continuation of failed policies. They are asking for a leaner more responsive government that works for them." Tim Walberg (R-MI) - Americans are "Slaves to humanism. Slaves to government. Behold, we are slaves today, and as to the land which you gave to our fathers to eat of its fruit and its bounty, behold we, Americans, are slaves in it."
Nope, they just demonstrate their party (which is republican, the "party of small government") and give an example of their attitudes. Feel free to find counterexamples if you can - perhaps Walberg calling for a larger federal government, or more regulation.
No need. Pandering in liberal states would seem to explain it, unless you can show overwhelming small-government Republican support for the bill.
So you can't find any examples to the contrary, even with the entire net to search from. Fair enough. In that case the original claim stands: The party of small/limited government wants you to pay a penalty should you not turn over your genetic "flaws" to your employer.
Curious thread. I had to look online for some source... http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...d-let-your-boss-demand-to-see-your-genes.html Now, I remember the day when a piss test was considered a violation of privacy. We certainly have moved far from that idea.
All Republicans claim to be small government, all of them favor corporate-friendly intrusions of that kind, backed by the law. Another corporate rightwing Republican favored notion, in its day - another contribution from the small-government folks, as they call themsleves.
I believe it was the "war on drugs" that ushered in the urinalysis. -I've yet to see either party challenge it.
A corporate rightwing favored notion, launched by Nixon, intensified and made Federal policy by Reagan, increased in severity by HW. The War On Drugs was how the real Americans - the people we now know as Trump voters - got together and handled the irresponsible drug-using liberals and blacks in Reagan's day - Morning In America, remember? That crowd is what it was for - getting their votes. http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...ug_testing_is_widespread_but_ineffective.html
It's been a while but I recall drug abuse being a major concern among Americans during that time. And I need to be honest, drugs were widely available and a real issue with the young. Why the fight needed morphing into the workplace, I don't know.
Private employers do have the right to set requirements for employment. If you find them unreasonable, you're just as free to not work there. Private jobs are not a welfare program. At-will employment is a mutually voluntary (free) interaction, and as such, both parties are free to demand things...both being equally free to look elsewhere if they don't agree. It can actually be less intrusion into this voluntary interaction.
Not "Americans". The targets of rightwing media and Republican propaganda, starting with Nixon and consolidating during Reagan's tenure. Including the entire voting base that tries to claim it favors "small government". The Trump voters. The "Tea Party" refugees from W&Cheney. The whole lot of you. http://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ They - the same corporate rightwing political forces, the same Party and its politicians - have been lying to you about the blacks and the hippies and the drugs ever since. Because it works, to lie to you guys. And these people will turn around and tell you they are libertarians, conservatives, in favor of freedom. And believe it.
No, they do not. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the right for the PEOPLE to be secure in their persons - and being able to refuse to give your DNA to someone else, upon penalty of losing your job, is about as unsecure as it gets. The philosophy "people can quit if they don't like the working conditions" died on the day the Triangle Shirtwaist company caught fire, and the bolted-shut fire doors resulted in 14 year olds jumping to their deaths from the tenth floor of the factory. 146 people total died in that fire. The employers tried that angle - "well, if they didn't want to work in a place with nailed shut fire doors, they could have just worked somewhere else" - but it didn't fly. Today, we (rightly) put restrictions on what employers can do to employees. Absolutely correct. They are employment - and as such must follow employment laws. Yes, we tried that - and tens of thousands died. Turns out that people who rely on employment for survival are not "equally free" to act as their employer is.
There's a difference between "working conditions" and "job requirements". Or do you think no employer has the right to demand employees with degrees? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! We still have at-will employment. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
They have every right to ask you to demonstrate your competence - whether that is a test there in the interview, or questions about relevant experience, or relevant degrees, or relevant independent work, or asking for references from people familiar with how competent or proficient you are. They have no right to demand that you provide proof that you are white, or are Muslim, or that you do not have the genes that code for sickle cell anemia - because (in 99.999% of cases) those have nothing to do with job performance. However, those things can (and have been) used by bigots to ensure that blacks don't get jobs (for example.) The reason we have the employment laws that we do is that, in the past, bigots and criminals have misused the freedoms they have had as employers to kill and maim their employees, and to ensure that blacks, or Jews, or hispanics, or handicapped people were denied jobs. We (rightly) decided that they should not have the freedom to do that.
They don't have the right to manage their health insurance risk pool to the benefit of all their other employees and as an incentive to those same employees? So you're against lower health insurance costs? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
