Wisconsin still using the 2008 National Electrical Code.

[Grantuspeace]

Governor Walker has blocked Wisconsin's adaptation of the 2011 National Electrical code. Wisconsin is one of only a handful of states still operating under the 2008 code. The non-union, Wisconsin Builders Association are Walker contributors and are behind this stance.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Why would they do that?

How does it benefit them to stay with the older code?

[Grantuspeace]

2. The buiders...

Handymen, and the untrained/under trained who don't even follow the 2008 code. You can make a lot of money if you cut corners and don't have to follow the rules or use archaic standards.

In 2013 a minimum licensing requirement is set to come into effect for those doing electrical work for pay.
I will be surprised if this law isn't repealed even before it takes effect.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. That does not address the 2011 NEC Issue

[Bonduel]

4. I am in the home building industry

I am not very familiar with this issue, but I will tell you this. We get so many new codes each and every year that make it more and more expensive to build a home. We can not even come close to competing with an existing home that doesn't require these updated codes. Obviously we need to improve codes for the safety of people but many codes don't make things safer but they sure do add costs to the job. And remember, those costs are passed on to the consumer. When it comes to multi-family apartments it can add to the rent and for people who are trying to be 1st time home buyers it makes the cost go up.

[mojowork_n]

5. Seriously? Do you know what you're implying?

If that's all true, then what you're saying is enforcement of new codes is an inevitable
cost multiplier -- like the curse of annual inflation, but with a much more steeply rising
curve -- negatively impacting those who can afford it the least, the most. (The costs
"trickle down" to renters and 1st-time home buyers.)

I'm in manufacturing, not home building, and I actually checked out this post to find out
if UL (Underwriters Laboratories) codes -- which our electrical department has to get
certification for -- were cited, and if it transferred at all to what we do.

But your post doesn't provide any actual information or examples or specifics, it's just a
big "no" to the whole concept of safety and economic feasibility having anything other
than a zero-sum relationship. (Fundamentally opposed, "your loss is my gain.&quot

That's not really been my experience. Far from it. We make packaging equipment for
beverage makers. The gallon of milk you bought yesterday or the day before was very possibly
filled (and the bottle capped) with machinery that we manufacture. Food safety standards
are what our company needs to be aware of, so that our customers (many dairies and
juice and other beverage bottlers) won't be put in the position of getting fined, or having
their products recalled. For example, there's a whole major taxonomic genus of machinery
lubricants -- specially manufactured oils and greases -- that are functionally equivalent to
conventional, petroleum-based lubricants, but aren't harmful to human health. So that if a
micro-small dollop of lubricant meant to keep the bottle-capping machine working efficiently
somehow -- God only knows how -- ends up inside one of the bottles, it's not going to hurt
anyone.

That used to be called the "NSF" (Food Safety) category of lubrication products. But it's no
longer a government-overseen or regulated classification standard. I can't remember, it may
have been near the end of Bill Clinton's 2nd term, or maybe it happened during the administration
of the second ARBUSTO, but the whole government department that oversaw and supervised
those "regulations" was eliminated. Privatization by eliminating the competition. I think there
was a generally held presumption that some industry council or other private group would
step forward and take over the responsibility for maintaining NSF standards, but that hasn't
happened. (Go figure -- all of the responsibility and risk but no potential at all for a financial
return -- it just hasn't happened.)

So at the moment, the next time you twist open a bottle of water, because gosh -- you're
sooooo thirsty -- the guidelines for keeping harmful crud out of that bottle -- haven't been
updated since I can't remember when.

That's actually been my general experience with these kinds of codes and regulations -- they
ALWAYS take a back seat to any economic factor that could possibly interfere with the price
of the product, or the economic health of the company that's involved.

So I'm wondering, can you go into any detail on your own experience, what it is exactly that's
made life so difficult for you, in the home building industry? If you have any specifics about UL
codes or other, municipal-jurisdiction or other local ordinances, that have impacted your company's
bottom line -- I'm still curious, trying to keep up with what's going on and staying current.