How can the government compel certain speech?
One could make the argument that it is illegal to defraud you tenants by failing to disclose a known hazard, such as lead paint. But how does one go from a duty do disclose to a requirement that an citizen must provide a certain pamphlet at a certain time? Shouldn’t he have the right to disclose the hazard in any manner he sees fit, and if he fails to do so adequately be subject to a tort?
And if the landlord hands over the pamphlet and says, “I have to give these pamphlets to everybody, but don’t worry about it, because all of our paint is safe”, has he met the requirements?
And what if a building was built prior to 1978, but it does not contain any lead paint? What is the point of handing out a pamphlet in that case? Back in the early 70s, people knew the hazards of lead-based paint, and many builders were careful not to use them. But these buildings get tarred with the broad brush simply because of the year they were built?
I have three words for these events:
Smith and Wesson.
“In addition, landlords can still be fined even if they prove that their property is free of lead-based paint. In that case, the EPA will merely “adjust the proposed penalty downward.””
Complete bull squats!
How? By presuming you're functioning in your "corporate aspect," and therefore that you come under its complete control. And also presuming that if you don't refute its corporate presumption, you agree to it, and therefore are bound by it.
That's how.
