It's weird how a smaller provision of a much larger work (Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986) are always trotted out as an argument against regulation. Like if you can't use the majority of the regulation in an argument against it, perhaps it's good regulation.

Although to the actually very narrow point raised, would you rather not know what substances were bad for you? Perhaps a lot of this is pointless as you will commonly see people saw materials without masks but at the same point would you buy carrots labeled with "This product is known to the state of CA to cause cancer?".

And to the rest of the regulation that isn't address by OP. It is very good that companies cannot just dump their cancerous waste materials into rivers.

What is this comment in relation to?