He’s always there for the industry, defending it on taxes, advertising, risk assessment, risk disclosure, regulation, costs of smoking, secondhand smoke.

His “research” comes out with the results the industry likes and uses in its PR. And ends up in the mouths of endless front groups.

He’s a consultant and expert witness for the industry in trial after trial.

He writes and submits extended comments to regulators on the industry’s behalf. And he’s not always upfront in disclosing the sponsor, e.g. “I have been retained by Covington and Burling to provide an analysis of the proposed OSH rule for indoor air quality”

http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/oev70a00

But to me the most noticeable thing about him is how out of touch he is with working people.

For instance, he has such an easy solution for secondhand smoke on the job:

“If workers perceive their exposures to ETS as unpleasant or risky, they will demand compensating differentials for those exposures”

Kip Viscusi, “Secondhand Smoke Facts and Fantasy”, in Regulation, Cato Review of Business and Government
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg18n3e.html

So easy for him to say. But the reality is not so easy. For instance:

“Steve Morris of Stockton is among the unemployed who will lose his federal benefits. The 56-year-old was laid off in February 2001 from his job handling data processing for a San Francisco law firm. He has found off-and-on temp work over the last two years but not a steady job.”

“With his state jobless benefits set to run out in March, Morris is considering moving to Las Vegas to attend a card dealer’s school to learn to deal blackjack and poker in casinos.”

“‘I don’t relish the idea of making less than half of what I’ve made while choking on secondhand smoke … but not working is not an option,’ he said.”

San Francsico Chronicle, December 9 2003
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/12/09/MNGEH3J5K51.DTL

So, will Steve Morris just “demand compensating differentials”? I don’t think so.

The reality is, Steve doesn’t get to make a lot of demands here. Steve’s running out of money. To live on.

Steve doesn’t get $6800 a day as an expert witness.

Steve may have to choke on secondhand smoke. 8 hours a day, 40 hours a week. For whatever they pay him. Which will also not be negotiable. That’s Steve’s reality.

It seems to me that anyone who suggests Steve should just “demand compensating differentials” is completely out of touch with this reality, with the lives of working people.

It seems to me it’s very comfortable from a Harvard office to put forth the opinion that worker health and safety is a problem best left to the market.

I’m guessing that in a Harvard office, you don’t breathe in secondhand smoke 8 hours a day, 40 hours a week, as a condition of your job.

I bet if you understand Steve Morris’s reality, if you have any idea what his life is like, his and millions of working people across America, you don’t come up with pronouncements like he should “demand compensating differentials”.