The different names used for Senate Bill 648 say a lot about what the people who use those names think of the bill.
Business advocates and the writers of the bill refer to it as the “N.C. Commerce Protection Act of 2013,” whereas activists and opponents of the bill call it “Ag-Gag” legislation.
The controversial part of the bill would make it illegal for a person to misrepresent himself or herself on an employment application in order to gain access to an employer’s facilities to document the place or remove records.
While it’s understandable that businesses don’t want potential employees lying about their intentions at the expense of the business, this bill’s stifling of information limits public exposure of potentially abhorrent — if sometimes legal — business practices.
The fact that this sort of activism exists points to a bigger problem with how business is regulated.
When offensive practices aren’t caught by regulators or, worse yet, aren’t regulated at all, activists can step in to help solve the problem.
Upton Sinclair may not have been an Food and Drug Administration employee, but “The Jungle” revolutionized food safety in America at a time when regulation was sparse.
Passage of this bill could criminalize those following in Sinclair’s footsteps.
If the N.C. General Assembly fears vigilante inspectors, it should improve its own regulatory efforts.
