The term “regulation” reflects the viewpoint of corporations and big businesses. From their perspective, regulations means a limitation on their “freedom.” Usually this freedom has to do with whatever it is they want, no matter whom it harms. For example, the freedom to drain the aquifers of Cochise County, and then move on.
But from the public’s viewpoint, a regulation is a protection from harm. It’s also an insurance policy against future harms. We live in a world where the stronger has the power to visit terrible things upon the weaker. That’s why we need protections, usually FOR individuals AGAINST corporate wrongdoing.
Corporations are actors who don’t live with or near the consequences of their actions. The world is full of unscrupulous corporations seeking to maximize profit regardless of outcomes. They may view any harm done to the public as regretable, but that’s how the cookie crumbles.
Imagine politicians saying they intend to get rid of 75% of public protections. How would the press report on this? How would regular-ass people react? It would go over like a lead zeppelin.
By demanding groundwater protections, not regulations, we keep the focus on everyday people. We resist the corporate lens and instead use a citizen lens.
The citizen-centered approach also invites us to give concrete examples of what protections look like–such as preserving groundwater in Cochise County to the seventh generation.
These are are our thoughts. What are yours?