Share this Post:

unEARTHED. The Earthjustice Blog

Chemical Manufacturers Love Toxics Reform: Really?

    SIGN-UP for our latest news and action alerts:
   Please leave this field empty

Facebook Fans

Related Blog Entries

by Jessica Knoblauch:
Friday Finds: McDonalds’ Pink Slime Problem

McDonald’s takes pink slime goop out of burgers It’s official: The next time you have a Big Mac craving, you no longer have to worry abou...

by Jessica Knoblauch:
Friday Finds: California Says No To The Brazilian

Plastic looks not so fantastic in parody rap video On the heels of LA's new law banning single-use plastic bags, spiritual advocacy group Green Sangh...

by Trip Van Noppen:
Getting the Dirt on Household Cleaners

Do household cleaners contain ingredients linked to asthma, nerve damage and other health effects? Manufacturers aren't telling, but Earthjustice atto...

Earthjustice on Twitter

View Susan Britton's blog posts
14 October 2009, 12:47 PM
It's hard to believe trade group's sudden change of heart

I know I am not alone in applauding EPA's recent announcement that it plans to push for reform of that 60-page weakling, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and develop "action plans" for several exceptionally bad actors, among them perfluorinated chemicals, phthalates and bisphenol A.

As it stands now, EPA has no authority to require manufacturers to submit toxicity or ecotoxicity information about the chemicals they produce, and no authority to require testing of any chemical on the market without clearing impossibly high hurdles. Not surprisingly, EPA has managed to regulate only a handful of chemicals in over three decades. So any talk of reform is cause for celebration.

But is that in fact the American Chemistry Council—the nation's most influential chemical manufacturers' trade group—cheering along in agreement?

It sure sounds like it. At last week's Future of U.S. Chemicals Policy conference, ACC announced that its "highest priority is public health and safety" and called for a "comprehensive approach" to reform. And, believe it or not, ACC's "ten principles" for modernizing TSCA would shift the burden to industry to provide EPA with the data it needs to make safety determinations, give EPA new authority to require testing, and recognize that children need special protection from chemical exposure.

Forgive my skepticism, but as SNL's Seth and Amy might put it, "Really?!" Because let's face it: as Environmental Working Group reminds us, this is the same industry that from the outset has concertedly resisted any form of mandatory testing, systematically lobbied to defeat every state right-to-know law proposed, and worked to shut down a series of state and local initiatives to regulate bisphenol A and other substances. And as Richard Denison notes in his terrific and nuanced TSCA blog ACC informed Congress as recently as 2006 of its view that "TSCA is a sound statutory and regulatory system" and a "robust vehicle that can effectively address emerging chemical issues."

I do recognize the possibility that, ennobled by the new administration, some leaders within the industry have in fact changed their positions for the better. And undoubtedly pure pragmatism has played a role in the turnaround: the ACC knows that reform is inevitable, and it must show willingness to compromise lest it squander this once-in-30-years opportunity to shape the laws governing its business.

But in the end, it's simply hard to believe, at least for now, that after decades of obstructionism, the chemical manufacturers truly have public safety as their number one concern and will conduct their lobbying activities with that as their animating ideal. That is why I support Earthjustice, Environmental Working Group and other public interest organizations working to ensure that the new TSCA looks nothing like the old.

Well done! Thank you very much for professional templates and community edition

Supraveni Chemicals manufactures plenty of chemical products like sodium sulphate, sulphuric acid, nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, barium sulphate & sodium hydroxide

As we know, the basic theory behind our constitutional government prohibits ex post facto laws; by enacting stronger toxic chemical laws brings with commeasurate decreases in liability-this is perhaps the evil twin of this powerless law, the other being that the consumer will have to pay increased prices for low cost, inexpensive manufactured products (Made in the USA). Never look a gift horse in the mouth or be branded radical environmentalist; in this case, the poisoners must not be allowed to escape their murders of innocent people. After all, ignorance of the law is not a valid defense; they know they poisoned people...

The chemical industry is in fear of total inspection and now is willing to allow some inspection of their inventory of chemicals, it too late for all those who got cancer, but not too late for lawsuits! We need to test all chemicals to find what they affect and how to really make them harmless as possible.

I too am skeptical. I have a sinking feeling that this will go the way of health care reform with the industry decrying the need for reform while lobbying hard against any meaningful reform. Since the European Union has adopted the Precautionary Principle for chemical legislation, the US has the potential to become the new dumping ground for toxic chemicals and products--like we have done to developing countries in the past. Only time will tell what the industry means by 'reform'.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <p> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.