Editorial writers in today's Orlando Sentinel say they oppose Department of Homeland Security regulations that attempt to beef up security at the nation's chemical plants to reduce the risks of terrorist attacks. They want Congress to legislate the issue. They complain because the administration focuses on managing chemical risks through improved security measures only. The Sentinel, like many activist groups, wants Homeland Security to pursue a green agenda that would force the elimination or drastic reduction of so-called “dangerous” or “toxic” chemicals. They also oppose Homeland Security's attempt to preempt states from passing such silly regulations. Frankly, I would have to agree with the Department of Homeland Security on this one. I want to continue having these “toxic” chemicals to clean my water, disinfect my hospitals, produce my food, etc. Not doing so is much more dangerous. The goal for any chemical risk policy should be management—not elimination of vital products. Indeed, CEI has documented some of the many reasons why the greens approach is foolish and even dangerous, as well as why we don't need more legislation to expand that nation's bureaucracy.