I've a different perspective on this and regret Jarlstrom's win. Amendment 10 empowers states to regulate themselves where the federal government doesn't. Therefore, I see Jarlstrom's win as a loss for the ability of states to regulate themselves. Each state has the right to make its own laws to govern the people of that state.
By the 1920's, dentistry was a regulated profession in Colorado. In the 1920's, a California dental company was expanding its business into Colorado. They hired 5 dentists, who claimed to have the proper education and licensure from the state. When complaints were lodged with the Board regarding botched oral surgeries, etc., an investigation was launched. They discovered that none of the 5 dentists in Colorado were educated or licensed. That prompted the State of Colorado to declare all professions, which included engineering. Can just anyone
claim to be a dentist, Medical Doctor, JD, CPA, etc.? Why should engineering be any different? Most states define engineering and what constitutes the practice of engineering just as they do for other professions. Constitutionally, that is their right.
In Old Town San Diego, the sheriff's office has a lot of history dating to the early 1800's and the establishment of laws to prevent unfair, dishonest, etc. behaviors and these were established long before California was a territory of the USA.
Given that history as well as recent history with the Peanut Company of America, Blue Bell Ice Cream, Con Agra, Imperial Sugar, BP, etc., I think engineering needs to be regulated to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Public means everyone by definition and is the Board's usage of public. We act as those public somehow means people we don't work with but "someone else" or "others" such as those in public works.
Engineering needs to up its game. The AMA bit the bullet about 10 years ago, which was not a popular act, to require all Medical Doctors to be licensed by the state thereby negating their version of the industrial exemption practiced in hospitals. Attorneys, per mine, fought a similar battle, primarily against Big Insurance, regarding who qualifies for the designation of "attorney" and their right to use "attorney." Per my attorney, it was a long, hard fought battle but they won. Good for them!
Laws don't grow in vacuums. They grow because people cannot regulate themselves enough to not harm others. That is one fundamental purpose of government, i.e., prevent harm.
When my cousin was Speaker of the House in Louisiana, I went to a committee meeting with him. Some of his constituents were trying to establish a different kind of bank and had to get a new bill passed to do it. They were not successful because it would have negated a previous bill that was established after some of the financial meltdowns that harmed a lot of people. That law protected the depositors in banks and they couldn't, in good conscience, allow consumers to be exposed to harm. They followed my cousin out of the committee room to press their case further. He patiently listened and explained to them again what just happened and why. Louisiana has 5 committees that prospective bills have to wind through before reaching the House floor for a vote. That tells me due diligence is done for each bill passed.
Everything needs checks and balances because people are fallible and we drive everything. I don't see government as any more corrupt than businesses, charities, etc.
History is important. Knowing how government works is important.
Pamela K. Quillin, P.E.
Quillin Engineering, LLC
NSPE-CO, Central Chapter
Dinner program:
![URL]](https://res.cloudinary.com/engtips/image/fetch/w_800,c_lfill,q_auto,f_auto,g_faces:center/[URL unfurl="true"]http://hi-tecdesigns.com/images/pictures/Footwell%20Animation%20Tiny.gif[/URL])
