"And no Reno the poster does not owe anyone an apology for pointing out an actual code role back attempt that could be an actual safety issue. "
Actually, Wisinspector, I think you do.
Your screen name suggests employment by the state. As you are a junior member of this forum, I have no context by which to judge your perspective.
"Safety" is quite often the blank check used to justify anything, no matter how absurd. The toipc is never as simple as it first appears, and this site has had a number of lively discussions on various aspects.
AFCI's have been, and continue to be, the focus of great debate. The latest salvo against them is an assertion by one of the developers that the laws of physics make it impossible for such a thing to exist at household voltages. You'll find a thread on that topic in this forum.
The NFPA likes AFCI's and want the latest version of their code adopted, without changes? Is this the same NFPA with a vested interest in selling new copies every few years? Is this the same NFPA that attempts to assert 'private property' ownership of the NEC? Sorry, but I can't see that angel's halo.
For the past year the State of Wisconsin has been in political turmoil, as the governor has a dispute with the public employees union. "Inspectors" are government employees. You have a dog in that fight.
The specifics of that political furball - which includes lawsuits, a failed recall attempt, a strike, and only Heaven knows what else - are beyond the scope of this fourm. It sure looks to me like you're trying to recruit us to join your jihad agains Mr. Walker. It won't happen.
A governor is the chef executive of a state's government, and all state offices report to him. He has the final say- though he must answer to the legislature and the voters. Whether to endorse the advice of one of his departments is his call. Whether to follow one process or another is his call.
You've been furnishing us with half-truths: leaving out any reference to precedent in the State, the recommendations of the State Board, and insinuating personal corruption on the governors' part. "Safety" is no excuse for such slanders.
You've also left out your stake in this matter; I don't believe for a second that you're just a concerned citizen who was surprised by the Governor's actions. No, you're acting in concert with his political foes.
Yes, IMO, you owe a few apologies. One to Mr. Walker for slandering him, and one to all of us for wasting our time.
