Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumThe president just signed a law that affects nearly every product you use
Source: Washington Post
The president just signed a law that affects nearly every product you use
By Darryl Fears June 22 at 12:26 PM
President Obama signed a bill into law Wednesday that places stronger regulations on chemicals present in nearly every product Americans use, including detergents, clothing, paint thinners, cleansers and automobiles.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act passed by Congress early this month in a rare bipartisan vote. It updates the Toxic Substances Control Act, which had not been reauthorized since the Ford administration in the mid-1970s. The new law gives the Environmental Protection Agency more oversight and stronger tools to monitor chemicals that in some cases could cause cancer and other health problems in adults and children.
Minutes before signing the law, Obama said the bill's passage showed that "even in the current polarized political process here in Washington, things can work." He added: "Somewhere on the horizon we can make politics less toxic as well."
Congress passed the legislation after decades of criticism from environmental groups that called on lawmakers to fix what they called "one of the worst environmental laws on the books." Federal oversight over chemicals was so weak that a court ruled the EPA lacked the power to fully regulate use of asbestos.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/06/22/obamatoxic/
Triana
(22,666 posts)(and I'm not sure they did?) then the law will be unenforceable/unworkable due to lack of resources to enforce it.
Wounded Bear
(58,440 posts)They're famous for defunding shit they don't like.
And yes, the might mean raising taxes to cover the expense. I'm sure we could find an undertaxed slice of society to pay for this.
angrychair
(8,594 posts)This is a bipartisan failure. No action was taken to address this by both R and D controlled congresses or administrations for decades. The chemical industry (Dow Cemical VP) actually helped write the original law that was meant to regulate them, no surprise that it never actually did that.
FYI, this new law is trash and not worth the paper it's written on with respect to actually fixing the issues it is meant to fix.
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Senate Sends Obama Toxic Chemicals Bill That Falls Short of Needed Reforms
For Immediate Release:
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
WASHINGTON -- With tonights voice vote in the Senate, chemicals policy reform legislation that fails to adequately protect human health and the environment is headed to the President, noted Environmental Working Group.
Following the voice vote, Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook and its senior vice president for government affairs, Scott Faber, issued the following statements:
EWG president Ken Cook:No one in the public health community asked for a toxics bill that is better than current law, because that law is so feeble it failed under industry challenge to ban a substance as deadly as asbestos. What we need is a law that aggressively protects people, especially children, on an urgent basis from the thousands of toxic chemicals that cause cancer, birth defects, nervous system disorders and other problems. This law simply will not accomplish that commonsense goal.
EWG senior vice president for government affairs Scott Faber:While the legislation Congress now sends to the president makes improvements to the worst environmental law on the books, it does not meet the reasonable expectations of American consumers. In particular, the bill may not provide EPA with the resources or clear legal authority the agency needs to quickly review and, if needed, ban dangerous chemicals linked to cancer and other serious health problems.
Thanks to the steadfast leadership of key senators, including Barbara Boxer, Ed Markey, Jeff Merkley, Sheldon Whitehouse and Cory Booker, the final bill does include important improvements. In particular, we thank them for their efforts to fight for tougher deadlines, new tools to collect chemical data, mandatory reviews of both new and old chemicals, new protections for vulnerable groups, and for more resources, and for their efforts to fight against overly broad restrictions on state action and unlimited trade secret claims. We are grateful for their tireless efforts on behalf of public health and look forward to working with them to keep the pressure on EPA.
We sincerely hope that the EPA will move quickly to review, regulate and ban dangerous chemicals. In the mean time, we will continue to urge consumers and responsible companies to drive the worst of the worst chemicals out of our homes, schools and businesses.
Senate Approves Update of Toxic-Chemical Regulations
By CORAL DAVENPORT
JUNE 7, 2016
...Public health advocates and environmentalists complained for decades that the 1976 law was outdated and riddled with gaps that left Americans exposed to harmful chemicals. Under current law, around 64,000 chemicals are not subject to environmental testing or regulation.
But efforts to tighten the law had stalled for years. The authors of the bill say their breakthrough represents a pragmatic, politically viable compromise between better environmental standards and the demands of industry. Senator Tom Udall, Democrat of New Mexico, worked closely with the American Chemistry Council to come up with language that would win the support of the industry and pass through the generally regulation-averse Republican Congress.
The new bill would require the Environmental Protection Agency to begin conducting tests on those 64,000 chemicals, but at a fairly slow pace: the agency would examine about 20 chemicals at a time, with a deadline of seven years per chemical. It would also allow the agencys regulations to pre-empt stronger state-level rules.
Environmental groups had pushed for an earlier iteration of the bill, which would have required the E.P.A. to test more than 100 existing chemicals a year, and which would have allowed states to enact stronger regulations.
House: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/25/us/politics/house-set-to-subject-64000-household-chemicals-to-regulation.html
More: https://www.nrdc.org/media/2016/160523
Regulating Chemicals: Law, Science, and the Unbearable Burdens of Regulation
Annual Review of Public Health
Vol. 36: 175-191 (Volume publication date March 2015)
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031914-122654
Ellen K. Silbergeld,1 Daniele Mandrioli,1 and Carl F. Cranor2
1Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland 21205;
2Department of Philosophy, University of California, Riverside, California 92521;
The challenges of regulating industrial chemicals remain unresolved in the United States. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976 was the first legislation to extend coverage to the regulation of industrial chemicals, both existing and newly registered. However, decisions related to both law and science that were made in passing this law inevitably rendered it ineffectual. Attempts to fix these shortcomings have not been successful. In light of the European Union's passage of innovative principles and requirements for chemical regulation, it is no longer possible to deny the opportunity and need for reform in US law and practice.
Ah, an ethicist.
angrychair
(8,594 posts)If anything comes out of Washington DC with the label "bipartisan agreement " you can be sure it doesn't actually fix anything and has more holes in it than Swiss cheese. This new law has holes big enough to drive through it.
It looks better than the old but it is just as unenforceable. From the article in OP:
"The failure to include a bulletproof safety standard or sufficient resources, along with the uncertain effects of new restrictions on state action, could ultimately result in less regulatory action than supporters claim," Melanie Benesh, an attorney, and Scott Faber, vice president of government affairs, wrote for EWG.
Chemical companies can continue to tie up the EPA's oversight in the courts, "which is exactly what happened 25 years ago when the courts overturned EPAs attempt to ban asbestos."
So while it looks great, there is no money or other resources to enforce any of it. It could still take years to take action, even if they did have the resources to do it. They can still tie any EPA enforcement up in court for decades.
As I have said and will continue to say:
"It's easy to talk about the virtues of compromise when you are not the one being compromised."
Angrychair
proverbialwisdom
(4,959 posts)Hundreds of Cancer-Causing Chemicals Pollute Americans Bodies
[center]From EWG, First Complete Inventory of Carcinogens in the U.S. Population[/center]
For Immediate Release:
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
WASHINGTON- Hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals are building up in the bodies of Americans, according to the first comprehensive inventory of the carcinogens that have been measured in people. EWG released the inventory today.
EWG spent almost a year reviewing more than 1,000 biomonitoring studies and other research by leading government agencies and independent scientists in the U.S. and around the world. The nonprofit research group found that up to 420 chemicals known or likely to cause cancer have been detected in blood, urine, hair and other human samples.
Studies of the causes of cancer often focus on tobacco, alcohol and over-exposure to the sun. But the World Health Organization and many other scientists believe nearly 1 in 5 cancers are caused by chemicals and other environmental exposuresnot only in the workplaces, but in consumer products, food, water and air.
EWGs review bolsters the findings and ongoing research of the Halifax Project, a collaboration of more than 300 scientists from around the world who are investigating new ways in which combinations of toxic chemicals in our environment may cause cancer. While most cancer research focuses on treatment, the Halifax Project and EWGs Rethinking Cancer initiative are looking at prevention by reducing peoples contact with cancer-causing chemicals.
The presence of a toxic chemical in our bodies does not necessarily mean it will cause harm, but this report details the astounding number of carcinogens we are exposed to in almost every part of life that are building up in our systems, said Curt DellaValle, author of the report and a senior scientist at EWG. At any given time some people may harbor dozens or hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals. This troubling truth underscores the need for greater awareness of our everyday exposure to chemicals and how to avoid them.
EWG estimated that a small subset of the chemicals inventoried in the report were measured at levels high enough to pose significant cancer risks in most Americans risks that generally exceed Environmental Protection Agency safety standards. But those estimates are only for individual chemicals and do not account for a question scientists and doctors are increasingly concerned abouthow combined exposures to multiple chemicals may increase risk?
EWGs inventory comes at an auspicious moment for the issue of cancer and chemicals. Last week Congress passed the first reform in 40 years of the nations woefully weak toxic chemical regulations, which President Obama is expected to sign soon. In January, the president announced the establishment of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, a $1 billion program led by Vice President Joe Biden, to eliminate cancer as we know it.
But the law to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act falls far short of giving the Environmental Protection Agency the resources and authority to quickly restrict or ban chemicals known to cause cancer. And the only concrete agenda related to prevention in the Moonshot Initiative is for screening and vaccination. As demonstrated by the success of antismoking efforts, which have cut the rate of lung cancer by more than 25 percent in the last 25 years, to prevent and defeat cancer it is necessary to understand the environmental causes.
It is not clear how, or if, the new chemicals law will protect Americans from the hundreds of industrial chemicals that cause cancer.
Many of the carcinogens this study documents in people find their way into our bodies through food, air, water and consumer products every day. Dozens of them show up in human umbilical cord bloodwhich means Americans are exposed to carcinogens before theyve left the womb, said EWG President Ken Cook. We should focus on preventing cancer by preventing human exposure to these chemicals.
Cook said the report should trigger outrage among Americans and urgent action by public health and elected officials. EWG called for the cancer Moonshot Initiative announced by President Obama in his state of the union address in January to include federal funding for investigation of the environmental causes of cancer and the development of prevention initiatives.
EWG has also published multiple health guides and online consumer tools to help people avoid toxic cancer-causing chemicals in their day to day lives.
[center]###[/center]
EWG is a nonprofit research organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. With breakthrough research and education, we drive consumer choice and civic action.
http://www.ewg.org/cancer/the-pollution-in-people.php
http://www.gettingtoknowcancer.org/
http://www.ewg.org/cancer/
http://www.cancer.gov/research/key-initiatives/moonshot-cancer-initiative
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/02/01/fact-sheet-investing-national-cancer-moonshot