The Virginia Coalition for Chemical Safety posted a video on YouTube featuring Coalition supporters in Virginia who favor reforming current Toxic Substances Control Act regulations in a way that leads to greater innovation, safety and job growth in the United States. The video features:
John Paul Woodley, Jr., former Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) and former Deputy Attorney General of Virginia for Government Operation.
Courtney Kuester, a mother who discusses the importance of having safe chemicals in the home
Paul Repak, Certified Safety Professional, DuPont Spurance Plant, discusses the Toxic Substances Control Act from the standpoint of the chemical industry.
Jason Schmidt of Helena, Montana — and a member of the Montana Coalition for Chemical Safety — has a strong piece in his local paper on the need for TSCA Reform built on the three-legged stool of safety, innovation and jobs.
While many people across the country are making a similar case, the fact that Jason owns a business called Phanes Solar and Renewables is, in itself, a strong argument for getting it right. TSCA reform won’t just impact chemical companies, chemical workers and chemical consumers. It will hit just about every modern business that’s out there. Solar energy, electric cars, semiconductors, you name it. Chemicals are a big part of all of them so folks like Jason need to be heard. Read his op-ed in the Billings Gazette here.
Let’s be clear. The Coalition for Chemical Safety absolutely believes that protecting American jobs should be an important factor in TSCA reform. But it’s not just the chemistry industry that will be affected by that reform.
Let’s just take one iconic American industry and use it as an example – automobiles. There’s no need to recount the woes of the Big Three. Everybody knows.
What everybody doesn’t know is everything those iconic American companies are doing to retool for a modern economy. Of course, you’ve probably heard of the Chevy Volt, the soon to be marketed electric car. But, the fact is, each of these companies is working on modern designs that could vastly reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil.
Chemistry plays a big role in this. Lightweight materials for body and engine parts are made with chemicals. The cars, be they straight up electric or hybrid, run on batteries, which are plastic boxes full of chemicals – and American scientists are working hard to make them more powerful and longer lasting.
All of that can come to a screeching halt if TSCA reform is done wrong. Some of the chemicals involved are harmful if misused. If used as intended, however, they are safe. In short, if TSCA is done right, the chemical innovation that will lead to the cars of the future, made here in America, will continue. This means we’ll have a cleaner environment, a continuing leadership role for the United States in a major sector of the global economy, and jobs, jobs, jobs.
It is about safety for all of us. It is about innovation for all of us. It is about jobs for all of us, whether those jobs are in chemistry or down the economic stream.
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/)
Transparency is something that gets a lot of lip service, but the words sometimes outstrip the actions. Which is why I’d like to address something that I know will be talked about regarding CCS. In fact, we’ve already had it thrown at us. The accusation: No one should listen to the Coalition for Chemical Safety because the American Chemistry Council is a member of the organization.
Fair enough.
If that persuades you, thanks for playing. We’ll catch you some other time.
(pause a moment while all those folks click to some other site)
Ok. Now that they’re gone, it’s true. ACC is a member of our organization. So are the Omaha (Nebraska) Fire Department and the Michigan Agribusiness Association, Ross Organic Specialty, Inc. in California and Southland Properties, Inc. in Louisiana.
What I’m unclear on is what it is about those members and more than 140 others that changes a few essential facts:
Our country is long past due for an overhaul of its chemical safety laws;
Any such overhaul should put safety first;
It should also be a law that encourages American industrial innovation; and,
It should protect American jobs.
If you believe all these things are true irrespective of our quite diverse array of members, then join us. If you think there’s something wrong with those principles, then the names on our membership roster are really quite immaterial.
As the drive to reform the nation’s chemical safety laws begins to pick up steam, we at the Coalition for Chemical Safety are committed to sharing information with our members and advocates at every step; the goal of the CCS blog is to provide another means of staying informed about this crucial issue.
With a number of organizations taking the stand that now is the time to revamp, reform or replace our country’s antiquated system for regulating chemical safety, the time has arrived to possibly get something done. That doesn’t mean everybody agrees on how best to proceed, and at this blog we’ll highlight some of those disagreements as a means of enlightening you.
For us, the prism through which we will view all of the chemical safety reform proposals on the table will not change. Proposals that would protect public safety, promote American chemical innovation and preserve American jobs will get our support. A failure to meet that three-pronged test is a failure to meet our approval.
The Coalition for Chemical Safety and its members across the country look forward to lending our voices to this important debate, and we look forward to you joining us, so come back often and click here to find out how to become a member and get involved today!
