Coalition for Chemical Safety Blog

Different Approaches

Dr. Richard Denison, senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund and one of the most vocal activists on TSCA reform, takes issue with the Coalition. In the interest of keeping you fully informed, here is his post on the EDF blog.

I responded directly to Richard on his blog, but wanted to post my response here as well, which addressed Richard’s concerns about our member list:

Actually, let’s clear up an error in fact. Agrichemicals that are synthesized are covered by TSCA. Natural fertilizers are not. Pesticides are covered under FIFRA, but the intermediaries used to make them are covered by TSCA. In other words, there is a clear Agribusiness interest in this issue.

But, if it was your intention to tell folks in agribusiness that they should just keep their mouths shut while the professionals handle this – that, in my view, is not a winning approach.

It is the view of the Coalition for Chemical Safety that if you want TSCA reform that puts safety first but also promotes American innovation (such as in the development of those safe new chemicals you mentioned) and protects American jobs then you are welcome to join us. If you think that’s a wrongheaded approach, then please don’t. (something we address here: http://blog.coalitionforchemsafety.com/2010/02/who-is-ccs/)

February 2, 2010 at 4:19 pm | Innovation, Jobs, TSCA Modernization, TSCA Reform | 33No commenthttp://blog.coalitionforchemsafety.com/2010/02/different-approaches/Different+Approaches2010-02-02+21%3A19%3A45Joe+Householder You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.