We Need Real Chemical Safety Standards
What do you get when you let the chemical industry write a
“chemical safety” bill? The last time Congress passed a chemical safety bill—the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)—was in 1976. The TSCA “was broken from the start,” according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), because it grandfathered in thousands of chemicals already on the market. It was so “broken and weak,” says EWG, that it didn’t even allow the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban asbestos, a known cause of cancer. Now, 39 years later, tens of thousands of new chemicals have been introduced, the majority of which have never been safety tested by the EPA. These chemicals, more than 80,000 of them, are in the food we eat, the clothes we wear and the homes we live in. It’s time for reform. But unfortunately, S.697—which still
doesn’t address asbestos—falls far short of accomplishing that.
That could have something to do with the fact that the chemical
industry
has spent $190 million lobbying for this bill. Democratic
Sponsor Tom Udall’s (D-N.M.) campaign received $49,050 from the
Chemical industry in the 2014 cycle, plus $23,500 from lobbyists
employed by the American Chemistry Council. Republican sponsor
David Vitter’s (R-La.) campaign received $20,600 in the 2014
cycle, and $14,300 from American Chemistry Council lobbyists.
We need your voice to stop this bill. "The legislation does nothing to ensure that terrifying disease clusters of children's cancers are addressed, and the killer of 10,000 Americans a year -- asbestos -- was entirely left out of the bill," Boxer said. "I will continue to call attention to the flaws of the bill and the improvements that are needed to protect our families." Boxer and her colleague Sen. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) have
introduced an
opposing bill, which
they say offers far better protection than S. 697, which
they say cripples state efforts to regulate toxic chemicals,
while leaving the federal government without the resources
needed to properly safety test them.
|