Weren't these regulations put in place to combat disposal of harmful waste in the environment? Weren't these regulations put in place to protect people from ingesting chemicals in their drinking water? Food? Isn't this the fundamental charge of the EPA?? This is nothing short of madness. When will the GOP put a stop to this? Contamination of our water supplies is an issue that is blind to partisanship!
9
The swamp just got a lot more toxic, thanks to the the currently corrosive EPA. Stocks may rise but so will water pollution. Shame. Shame. Shame.
5
Let me get this straight: they know of 63 million pounds of impending toxic emissions, it costs too much remediate them, so we won’t study them. Is that it?
Reminds me of Betsy DeVos’s approach to study of school shootings (except for anything to do with guns).
What do you bet all these studies suggest we spend much more time in prayer?
What deals has Scott Pruitt made in his secrets-preserving booth?
4
4 months til we vote to reassert sanity over the runaway beer truck that is EPA management.
7
Unbelievable, except, sadly not with this EPA. They care only for their pals' money not the environment. Don't they have children and grandchildren who will inherit a more toxic world?
11
Now Pruitt's staff can use perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene, and other toxic chemicals to clean the boss's used Trump hotel mattress without knowledge of the chemicals' toxicity. Ignorance is bliss in the Trump administration.
6
Rape, pillage and plunder - they're the same whether the people doing it wear suits and use computers, or not. Our environment has the possibility of recovering from decades or more of disposing of lethal chemicals in unsafe ways under earlier rules of the EPA. Now, the chemical companies and companies that use the chemicals are free to throw their lethal garbage wherever they want, whichever place is cheapest. The poorest people always suffer for this, but if it gets bad enough, we all will suffer.
I always wonder where they live, and where they expect to live, to escape the results of the incessant assaults on the world we live in - the air, the water, the land.
3
The change in policy is completely appropriate. One should certainly consider the risks to the environment in developing waste disposal protocols. However, risk to the environment due to improper disposal of a chemical is not relevant to wether a compound should be used. Even the most toxic compounds are not problematic provided they are properly used and disposed of. Indeed, every reader of the NY Times would be irate if we banned the use of highly toxic compounds that would be problematic if released into the environment. If you did this, you could say goodby to your cell phone, computers, modern antibiotics, etc.
1
Did this article bury the lede? Throughout reading it, I was wondering why no one was suing the EPA over the easing of restrictions on chemicals. It's great that an environmental group is doing so.
It's been clear for the past year that each agency director and cabinet member was chosen mostly to undo any restrictions that businesses don't want. While Republicans try to tell us that they are for small government, what they are doing shouts that they are for businesses at the expense of citizens.
Let us get that fact out in the open and make sure that every American understands that the current administration couldn't care less about individuals, their health and their welfare.
6
The rest of the nation will be spared what California endures. Over zealous officials pursuing companies to punish, coffee roasters and bakers installing $50k natural gas powered air scrubbers, composters of landscape material, that used to go in landfill, are considered carbon emitters..= high cost of living.
1
All part of the GOP's greatest project – the dismantling of the federal government from within, driven by a revolving door of industry infiltrators (at EPA, FCC, DoJ, many others), clueless loyalists (DeVos, Carson, Perry, et al) and Trump nepotism. Which is why we need greater, ongoing and relentless coverage of the toxic effects of Trump and his cronies on the entire federal government, and less focus on the sideshow.
Yes, the NYT and others cover it, because we're reading it – in between endless articles about Stormy Daniels, the legal circus around the Mueller investigation, infighting in the White House, Trump's latest tweet and incisive analysis on Why This Is Bad For Trump (But Really Isn't). Outrage at this administration is justified, but it should be driven by substance, not distraction.
2
People should boycott products by corporations that produce these dangerous chemicals. Stop dry cleaning your clothes.
We can also buy natural shampoo and stop wearing cosmetics until these companies get the message.
4
What next? No meat inspectors? No testing of pharmaceuticals? No airplane safety checks?
The EPA and other agencies and rules came about because people died from corporate, governmental and societal negligence. So much for putting Americans first.
The next POTUS needs to issue a blanket "everything Trump and his cronies did, undo" executive order.
7
Let's just rename the agency : the Environmental Destruction Agency. This is appropriate as it better describes its mission.
Let's add this to the long, long list of terrible decisions by the Trump administration.
No president has brought more havoc, discord and disgrace to the office and our country than
Donald J. Trump.
The Republican controlled Congress could have checked the abuses of this president but has failed miserably in their responsibilities. They are co-conspirators with Trump and shoulder blame for what has been done to our country and our citizens. Shame on all of them.
9
As if one needed more motivation to vote for the opposition in the midterm elections, we are presented with this horrific set of new directives at the EPA. Others have pointed out that the new directives explicitly contravene the EPA's statutory mandate, so challenges via lawsuit might be successful (but take years to wend their way up the courts, even in the best case). A Congress that, unlike the present administration and its congressional toadies, values both the environment and corporate profits might be able to reinforce the EPA's founding legislation and restore its proper function.
5
It has become the CPA: Chemical Protection Agency
3
Making America polluted again thanks to Trump and the GOP! Wake up America and vote out these politicians who cater to special interests against the health and well being of all of us!
7
This is what we deserve for electing Trump. Once every man, women, and child of the United States of America has cancer maybe we will wake up and stop voting clowns into public office.
14
Scott Pruitt is a 'criminal' of sorts, with huge conflicts of interest that make him unworthy of leading (abusing) the E.P.A.; but giving an industry free rein to pollute and expose us to toxins and cause disease and possibly shorten our lives is a step too far for basic decency. The only reason that Pruitt is not fired (and ideally put in jail) is because he enjoys the support of a like-abuser occupying the Oval Office, and who may be unable to see this outrage for what it is, a glaring abuse of the office and a distinct danger to others. Short of ousting the runaway despot in the White House, there may be no remedy to speak of. No shame, no morals; just crude trampling of all we hold dear. What will it take to gather the will to stop this mayhem?
9
The crooks and cons making up trump administration (define KAKISTOCRACY) led by the biggest conman of all sure are "MAGA".
That is if you prefer pollution to clean water and air. Or head a major US corporation or are a Koch, Mercer, Adelson and other right wing funders of the Party which places itself over Country 24/7. While simultaneously blaming Democrats for every ill in the Country.
In fact our deficits have grown largest under republican leadership going back to St. Ronnie of Reagan.
Not to mention such rabid manipulation by guys like Lee Atwater, Karl Rove, Steve Bannon, Roger Ailes with bloviating Fox and other right wing media. Who all whine about "everyone is against us" when they've controlled congress, courts etc., thanks to gerrymandering, voter suppression, on through to Russian meddling and comey's letter.
Refusing to support the Paris accord and other attempts to lessen climate change (a FACT based occurrence); Pruitt's destruction of EPA, while lining his pockets and wasting taxpayer funds), Zinke at Interior looking to sell off public land; and the Republican desire to decimate social security and Medicare in favor of privatization (read mega kick backs) we have reached the nadir of our political system.
Add in awful Republican appointments to the Supreme Court: Thomas, Scalia, Alito, Gorsuch... and whoever else trump is told to appoint if Kennedy or RBG retire. So SAD.
Trump may be "winning by HIS estimation, but WE are LOSING.
6
EVERYTHING Trump and GOP do benefits the super rich at the expense of the 99%, the planet, and everything else. This is just another "trickle down"...this time of poison.
14
...And yet again America falls behind the rest of the world in a variety of toxic ways. Can state laws counteract this atrocity, or is America about to become the next Oklahoma?
9
I just don't recognize this country any more. separating children from their parents, urging the return of Russia to the G7 after they annexed Crimea, kowtowing to the chemical giants - people, wake up!!
23
This is tantamount to conspiracy to commit murder.
13
Yet one more reason to get to the polls in November. Impeachment being the main one, no matter what Pelosi or the rest of the blind Democratic leadership says.
November is a referendum on Impeachment.
Then there is everything else, like this story.
4
Make America a dump again!
13
Works well with attempt to remove protection for preexisting conditions, and allowing elimination of cancer coverage from individual health insurance policies that was introduced just yesterday. The government allows you to be bathed in contaminated water and breathe contaminated air, and then can't help you if you get sick from it.
12
Wow. Stock up on those water filters people.
And in related news, while the EPA is increasing the chances of people being exposed to potentially toxic chemicals, the DOJ is simultaneously calling petitioning courts to hold that the ACA’s insurance protections for those with pre-existing conditions is unconstitutional! So on the one hand, people are more likely to be exposed to chemicals that could cause harm over a long period of time (cancers, for instance). On the other hand, the Trump administration is also trying to make it so that if/when such a condition is discovered, it will be all but impossible to obtain insurance.
And if you’re wondering how insurance companies are supposed to insure someone with pre-existing conditions, well, that’s what the individual mandate was addressing (creating enough healthy insureds to cover those with pre-existing conditions). The DOJ is currently attacking that as well. These factors combine to illustrate how the GOP’s new strategy in the war on poverty is not so much about eliminating poverty itself, so much as attacking those afflicted by it.
10
My mother's small town in South Texas is getting ready for the world's biggest plastics plant which will be run by the Saudi gov and Exxon, right next to a shipping channel which has all kinds of chemical companies right on the bays. The people there had very little input and the ones concerned were assured that the tons of benzene and ethylene will be monitored! No worries! Yeah, by Scott Pruitt's deaf and blind and now sold-out EPA.
16
Rural America needs a hero. And it wont be the GOP who protects the people and installs the people who then sell out these folks.
A quarter of rural kids live in poverty and go hungry. Scott Pruitt's EPA just made it legal again for certain chemicals they KNOW is poisonous to youngsters on farms. Farmers have the highest suicide rates.
I guess if you finally just do these folks in then you wont have to face what you did to them, how you lied to them for their votes.
9
Who cares if the air we breathe, the water we drink and the soil our food is grown in are full of pollutants.
CEOs will have larger profits without those concerns.
Besides, nobody really remembers the 70's with the awful smog.
This goes hand in hand with the DOJ not defending the Affordable Care Act, it's not like anyone suffering the effects of polluted air, water and soil would need any health care.
All this winning. Exactly what are we winning?
Vote Democratic on November 6th.
Changing congress is how we begin to fix this mess.
Vote for the future. Vote for the Earth.
10
I agree wholeheartedly! I am old enough to remember when the EPA was formed during the Nixon administration and given responsibility for enforcing the then recently passed Clean Air and Clean Water acts. I was a college student in Birmingham, AL during the late 1960s. In November, 1971, the fledgling EPA first invoked the emergency powers of the Clean Air Act in the courts of Alabama over an air pollution crisis in Birmingham. To read about the air pollution event of November, 1971, go to http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/11/post_698.html. Take a good look at the photo of the city of Birmingham back then. Would you want to breathe that air? That is what air can look like when industry operates without governmental intervention. I guess that photo is the image of what Trump and Pruitt want us to return to. Would you want to breathe that air? If the EPA won’t check for air pollution under the Obama administration bill, how can we trust that they will enforce The Clean Air Act?
2
I remember! I lived in California in the 70’s, leaving a state that had a river on fire.
1
Nobody is safe while Trump and his band of cronies undo all the protections the American people have come to rely on.
5
This is beyond sad. Why don't they just go ahead and find a way to abolish the EPA altogether? Stop pretending. Republicans used to try to maintain a facade of decency. Now they put their venality in our faces 24/7 and laugh about it. I can't believe that even most Trump supporters would agree with this if they knew about it.
5
So when the GOP says deregulation encourages growth and helps create jobs, what they mean is that letting companies pollute our ground, air, and water will help create jobs in poison control centers, respiratory therapy, and cancer treatment.
Thanks, Trump voters.
8
Money far more than children's health is their lodestar. These government officials must be held PERSONALLY responsible for the health consequences of poisoning the waters and lands of our great country. So if my baby is born without arms or legs (or God-forbid THEIR child is born blind and deaf) poisoned by one of these chemicals, we citizens should be able to sue them PERSONALLY for reparations. Only then, only when they are confronted with the enormity of this catastrophe, will they come face-to-face with the consequences of their crime.
4
With any other administration it would have been news for months to install a former industry lobbying lawyer into the job of overseeing that industry. With Trump it is just one of many daily outrages. Talk about draining the swamp - straight into our drinking water.
8
Humans are generally pretty shortsighted, but this is just plain stupid. For a few extra dollars in the short term, we're going to cost everyone many more down the road, not to mention the costs in human suffering that will be associated with the losses in dollars.
But, you know, the 1% don't live in the areas that will bear the brunt of these policies. Their children won't be harmed. They can afford the best health care if by chance anything does spill over to them.
The environment isn't some abstract thing scholars can debate about from their armchairs. We have to live in it, people.
8
Seems like our mafia government is now in complete control of wasting the environment, polluting every citizen young and old, stopping all research that would benefit our health, and denying science on climate change, does anyone remember the T-shirts people before profits? God help us all.
3
trumps followers must be very happy. Contaminated water and polluted air is what they wanted. No?
7
This is disgusting. It’s a prime reason these horrible men - Pruitt and trump - need to be carted off ASAP.
Morally horrible, these dolts don’t care a whit about anyone except themselves oh but if a fetus gets poisoned then they care.
This isn’t an America I know. It’s a game show.
8
This too shall be reversed. Come the next President all things Trumped will be put on a trash heap and burned.
7
The GOP loves the constitution. Many of the laws passed under the system defined by that constitution - not so much. Pretty ironic.
If the GOP did care about the laws that resulted from that constitution, and saw the president was not executing them, they could threaten impeachment, which would cause Trump to fire Pruitt. But, they believe more in their personal greed and enrichment that the laws derived from the workings of the constitution.
3
Well, the Republicans talk Constitution when it suits them; the rest of the time, it’s mostly what’s best for them and their swamp buddies.
6
Pruitt continues to be the second biggest grifter after Trump, now employing former Chemical Lobbyist Nancy Beck as his weapon to release big biz's liability from protecting the citizens of the US from polluting us with their cancer causing chemicals.
There will be a special place reserved in the afterlife for the both of them along with chemical laden big biz. In the meantime, a toast to them with their magic water air and soil, and may they arrive their without and at least before the rest of us!
When many Republicans mean when they say "smaller government" is "no government."
3
No, not quite. They mean their government. And we're getting a good taste of what that's like. A free-for-all for the moneyed class and its wannabe cheerleaders.
6
Testing for chemical toxicity after the toxic chemical is in the air, earth or water? Really? You mean it didn't kill enough people in the workplace so its okay? I draw your attention to the mega-pig farms dumping pig waste in rivers and streams, resulting in the explosive growth of toxic algae, killing plants and fish, and causing burns on the skin of the people who come into contact with the now toxic water. Additionally, a human body may be large enough to not be poisoned by x/ppm, but is it really okay to kill all the other life forms along the way?
6
EPA's too-visible policy changes like this spark controversy. Far easier to cut pollution using Trump math: just change the readings to start at, say, minus 30.
See how Trump added 30 floors overnight to his Tower in NY. (Donald Trump’s Math Takes His Towers to Greater Heights https://nyti.ms/2e03oL1)
The town I live in had its own water supply at one time until W.R.Grace (the same chemical company "villain" in the movie and book A Civil Action) started depositing dump trucks' full of chemicals into our streams secretly at night. My husband witnessed a few of these "deposits." Is this what Trump voters wanted from the good old days?
2
Say good-bye to your aquifer, Americans, where ever you live. And be careful when a new chemical refining or fossil fuel plant is coming to your town. The air you breath may be your last.
1
Hey Trump voters, guess what? The guy you voted in office would rather let companies make more money than save your lives. He's literally allowing companies to poison your water, land and air.
When do you wake up? When your wife or husband gets cancer? When your drinking water becomes undrinkable? When your cries of MAGA are stifled by the hacking on the chemicals in the air?
When?!
5
So, the EPA will not look for contaminants in air, water or th ground but it will spend its funds searching for apartments, over-priced fountain pens and Trump Hotel mattresses. Makes perfect sense - to every Republican member of Congress that allows this charade to continue and every evangelical Christian who is thrilled to see their new saviors re-exert "man's dominion" over the earth. Fools.
3
Do those health and safety risks pose a threat to the rights of the oil and gas industries?
Can we at least change the name of the E.P.A. to reflect something more like the new direction the agency has taken? Maybe Polluters Protection Agency?
1
The industries that own Pruitt should be careful what they ask for. I hope and expect that when the EPA is restored to its actual role, it will restore the restrictions with strong penalties, retroactively, and with a vengeance.
8
Unbelievable!! Just unbelievable!! I wonder how much time and nation treasure will have to expended in the future to clean up the mess the chemical industry will now leave in it's wake. Another national disaster in the making, not mention impacts on health.
5
Unbelievable. I thought we were a civilized country.
5
Every time I see news like this I keep reminding myself “this is what most white Americans voted for.”
No guilt here.
Can Trump start slavery, just like the days when USA used to be the "greatest" before 1861 and also before 1964? Probably such big business lobbies already started the campaign, as they can get free labor and almost no oversight over their business practice. Republicans can boast to cut more tax too.
How much damage this Trump Presidency can do and how much general Americans must tolerate before we kick out this mad and corrupt administration from White house and put them in jail, where they belong?
3
Remember the Chinese melamine scandal where a toxic chemical was put in milk as a preservative? Well, seems like Trump and his team of corrupt officials have opened the door to future tragedies of this nature. Money will be made, but at whose expense?
2
I hope those lobbyists choke - or worse - on their dry-cleaned shirts. The rest of us will. Honestly, I have to stop reading the news. It's toxic to me.
1
This is going to be Trump's legacy. The degradation of our environment and the return to pre-1970's standards of air and water, all in the name of corporate profits.
If Trump's precious base truly understood what is going on and what is at stake here, they would march on Washington with pitchforks and torches. Instead they buy into Trump's propaganda about creating more jobs and growing the economy.
The reality is that few jobs will come from this (or the Tax Cut). Our health will suffer while it will become nearly impossible to find affordable health care. The economy will tank as well once the effects of the coming trade wars kick in.
We are all in the same boat breathing the same air and drinking the same water. Asthma and other chronic respiratory diseases don't care if you are Republican or Democrat. Toxins are absorbed by bodies on both sides of the aisle. Our health is being sold out to the highest bidder. Corporate and personal greed is the order of the day in this administration.
Trump has drained the swamp and replaced it with a toxic cesspool with Pruit controlling the waste flow.
1
There should be a "quid pro quo" whenever the EPA favors industry over people- If they scale back studies and investigations- the "said" industry needs to be held accountable in case people start getting sick or die.. Let Dow or DuPont put their money where their mouth is...
1
What did the lobbyists do- offer Scott Pruitt a life-time supply of moisturizer and a chicken fast food franchise for his wife??
Can Americans sue this office for breach of its duty to the safety of the public? Can there be a class action lawsuit for such blatant lack of concern from the EPA?
9
This year 1,750,000 Americans will be diagnosed with cancer and 750,000 will die despite the best treatment.
Clearly, we are losing the war on cancer.
Poisons now permeate the food, air, water and environment.
EPAs Pruitt is the swamp Trump promised to drain.
He must be removed.
8
What a blessing that would be if the big guy at 1600 and the jerk running the EPA were included in that number. It would be Justice.
7
Why doesn't Trump stop messing around and just disband the EPA? He couldn't be much more blatant in his determination to stop the EPA doing anything which might help the environment at the expense of big business, so why not give Scott Pruitt even more time to freeload at the taxpayers' expense and protect himself from phantom menaces? Global Warming is a myth, and all those other environmental scaremongering stories probably are as well.
Go straight to pruitt’s back account there is sure to be a deposit from the chemical lobby or large chemical interest.
The GOP simply cannot be trusted to run this country. It really is no more complicated than that.
Everyone must vote in every election for which they are eligible.
For we the people it is time to declare war on the GOP as an organization. Being complicit in many ways is equal to the commission of the actual crime.
It’s time we voted in the best interest of our nation, that means removal of the GOP from any elected office.
7
It should be obvious now. Laws that the the fossil fuel chemical industry can't change, they just break. Same with their racist agenda.
2
Mr. Trump said he's going to "drain the swamp" of these lobbyist. Instead he appoints them to run his administration.
Do Americans come first, before special interests, Mr Trump? And before you declare "America First" shouldn't you declare, "Americans First"?
4
Don't worry, the unscrutinized poisoning is limited to the air, land, and water. Everything else should be OK.
I can't figure out whether this despicable person Pruitt thinks the EPA stands for "Environmental Pollution Advancement" or "Executive Profiteering Association". He's not only destroying the environment, he's brazenly lining his pockets in the process.
2
Americans somehow gave Donald Trump the most powerful leverage possible to carry out his long-held grudge against the America-of-reason that has haunted him since childhood. That we replaced one of our most considerate, honest leaders with what appears to be the most evil, least enlightened choice possible defies understanding.
13
My outrage at the desecrations of Pruitt, Trump* and all the oligarch-enablers is already turned up to 11. Perhaps I can find a 'Level 17' in my efforts to stymie the GOP destruction.
Since money is power, er, I mean speech, this is just more motivation to give financial support to whomever will mitigate the hellishness of the current Republican gang.
1
Neither Trump nor anybody in his administration care about the health and welfare of anybody who isn't a billionaire, nor do they care about living things such as wildlife. His administration is despicable. I don't believe in hell but if I did, I'd say there is a special place there for Trump, Pruitt, and all the people who are complicit in this corrupt administration.
8
Trump is live that evil kid you knew when you were growing up. He'd take a caught fly and tear it apart piece by piece.
Sickeningly, Trump is doing this to your country!
9
Another clue that Pruitt and his chemical buddies could not care less about the American People. Profit, and bribes, are their only goal.
2
Whew.
Thank goodness nothing in the air, water or ground affects health!
Oh wait......
2
This is a direct sign that our children and grandchildren are targets of those who would enable poisoners just as much as those who would shoot them with guns.
5
Why are we still calling it the EPA? It should be renamed the BBPA-Big Business Protection Agency !
4
Unbelievable. This a such a blatant disregard for the public welfare, it's just dismaying. We need to vote against this administration. The current EPA is more concerned wth looking out for the interests of polluters than protecting the environment. Ugh, what a horrible state of affairs. Where's the foresight? Where's the sense of responsibility?
3
When the Trump corruption is voted out in 2020, the new administration will have a staggering number of wrongs to right, with the reinstatement of the EPA as a force to preserve our environmental health and safety a top priority. Why is Trump doing these things to our country? Is it ignorance? stupidity? or just greed?
6
What is good for the chemical induatry is bad for American air, land and water?
1
Not true - the chemical industry can and is changing and making profits as well
https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i26/Five-green-chemistry-success-stories...
Obviously science was not taken into account. There is what is known as the low-dose effect, negative health effects at very low doses that differ from the effects at high doses; and the toxic cocktail effect, the mixture of several toxins each individually below levels considered to be harmful to human health, but together, way above. There is also the concept known as bioaccumulation, small amounts of toxins that accumulate in the environment and can threaten our food supply.
This is why the Director of the EPA must be science, not business oriented.
4
Perhaps the name could be changed, from EPA to PFEI: 'Protection From Environmental Interests'. If we're going to regress, we might as well be honest about. Or is honesty also on the hit list?
3
I want to get this one straight. The chemical industry after much lobbying has been successful in making sure the medical, big pharma, coal producers, cockroaches, funeral parlors, producers of products where the mere manufacture of those products can destroy the environment make a real and incredible killing in the stock, bond, and investment markets. Fox News proclaims MAGA based upon the market & unemployment figures. WOW! Really?
Geeze! Talk about cutting off your nose to spite for your face. Ah-ha, we now have the new swamp which will make us disappear from the face of this earth. BTW, there is no where else for folks to go and live in the universe. DJT and his band of morally bankrupt enablers have created a new swamp wherein an ignorant population has been monetized. Ms. De Vos' educational vision creates folks not able to comprehend why the EPA was created, necessary & strengthened.
At what point do the folks who voted for this horror show realize that the model for election of such folks is as follows: I'll give the common people or 99% $5.00 while the 1% steals trillions because its their gospel that God has granted that 1% the right to rule. I guess Mr. Marx was correct that religion is the opiate of the people. However, what Mr. Marx didn't realize is that there are many other opiates, i.e., money, jobs which cost one's soul, etc.! Real cockroaches unite because the earth will soon be yours thanks to the new EPA. I could go on and on. Pathetic.
13
My sentiments, exactly ! And you should go on and on. Pruitt and his gang should show us all just how safe his policies will be buy having a nice tall drink of the contaminated water that will be the price of his lunacy . They are all so greedy and unconcerned that it is incomprehensible to anyone with even half a brain. Mind bogaling!
2
What else is there to look at?!
2
Damn, this administration is going to give my children cancer. Talk about making America great again. Certainly not for my kids.
5
Hello, Cancer, my old friend....
2
EPA looks at corporate balance sheets, not pollution risk data. That's the Pruitt Policy. He is protecting the corporate environment.
4
In light of the new interpretation of the role of the E.P.A.'s toxic chemical unit, perhaps we should rename it the C.P.A. RAW
1
The Environmental Destruction Agency.
The Environmental Pollution Agency has spoken.
EPA = Environmental Pollution Agency
Even Nixon would be appalled.
1
Bringing sanity back to the EPA is a good thing.
It is not sanity to OK chemicals that poisons kids who live on farms. That is the very definition of insanity.
3
So Republicans and the Trump administration will go to great lengths to "protect the unborn", but once we're born there is no concern for us. We only exist to serve as a market and dumping ground for whatever industry wants to throw at us. There is no problem if we may drink, eat, or breathe their poisons. Am I the only one who sees something wrong with this?
5
The "unborn" will be the first to suffer. Fetuses are very sensitive to pollutants and toxic chemicals. If this madness keeps up, many of the "unborn" are likely to remain unborn.
3
A "big win" for the chemical industry and losing Anthony Bourdain on the same day. Almost too much to bear.
2
This is the perfect example of just how dangerous this administration is to the well being of every citizen of this country, and the entire world. This is just absolutely disguting how this government continues to destroy this country for business interests. The voters were warned of the goals and intentions of the degenerate masquerading as a president. WE have only ourselves to blame, and yet, his deplorable base will stick with him all the way to the grave yard.
2
I agree, but you might want to be careful in calling Trump's base "deplorable". Just ask Hillary where that can lead.
Love Canal 2.0 coming!
The environmental release of PCE and TCE commonly leads to breakdown chemicals such as cis-1,2-DCE and Vinyl Chloride (VC). This especially occurs in anaerobic conditions like some groundwaters and lake-bottom environs, where their density differential with water can promote PCE/TCE accumulations (they have densities greater than 1 g/cc). Vinyl chloride is actually more hazardous and transportive (both more soluble and higher vapor pressure) than the parent PCE/TCE. So this secondary and ignored exposure pathway actually is MORE hazardous to biologic environs and humans than the primary products (i.e., groundwater consumption and indoor air when homes & businesses are near/over soil & groundwater impacts). Pollution is a form of trespassing and land degradation, so Republicans are promoting trespassing and devaluing your land when polluted with other folks' carelessness. This does not sound conservative at all. We will follow the money come January 2019.
6
This reprehensible disregard for the water and air that are essential to life bespeaks a government that has no care for the well being of its citizens. No wonder the suicide rate has increased so drastically over the years when we suffer the inanity of such careless government.
1
I'm old enough to remember how filthy (that's the only appropriate word for it) the environment was in the late 60s and early 70s. The creation of the EPA (oddly enough one of the few things Nixon actually did that wasn't self-serving) and strict laws in the states fixed a lot of that. Apparently, while the population forgot, industry didn't, and they've been itching to remove all the safeguards for our environment, how health, and future generation's health. How is this "Making Amercan Great" in any way? Combined with the recent Supreme Court ruling about Mandatory Arbitration, this is basic a free "Harm people as much as you want" card for industry from now on with virtually no recourse by the people or families they hurt or kill through negligence in search of bigger profits.
I don't want to hear from the supporters of this measure that somehow the regulations were "job killing." If it comes down to choosing between actions which are "job killing" and those that are "people killing" I know where I stand.
4
So if it is not protecting air, water or ground, just what part of the environment is the EPA protecting? As Americans learn that they cannot count on the safety of the water they use, the air they breath and the lands that they live on, it will lead to distrust of the economic system as a whole. This information-adverse administration operates under the assumption that unbiased information is the enemy because it so infrequently provides support for their retrograde policies. However, this policy opens the door to other forces who will sensationalize pollution threats, causing panic to ensue when the populace believes life's essentials are hazardous.
1
Soon we’ll be buying water in bottles. Because some billionaires want another yacht.
2
since the water is poisoned, the fish eaten by the bears hunted are poisoned as are the cows and the produce we eat. the bad news is, who gets to shoot the grizzlies, when we are all dead? Trump has no checks and balances and without a rational voice in two branches, I pray for litigation less we descend further down towards failed empires by allowing the chemists to kill mother nature.
1
Pruitt was put in the EPA to do one job: Destroy the EPA. He and his chemical buddies could not care less about people or the environment. To them the ONLY goal is profit. And naturally all companies want to externalize all their costs - including those involving killing people with chemicals and destroying the environment. They would rather have people die - ie, pay the cost - than prevent that - which cost them profits. Always remember: Republicans HATE people getting in the way of profits. They would literally rather have people die than give up ANY profits. This is the end result of that philosophy. Trumpers - are you paying attention AT ALL?
11
The chemical cartel and the political system they and all industries have bought off don't give two rotten nickels about you or the environment. In fact, it doesn't matter what any of us think because we don't exist.
From a Princeton University study: Public opinion has “near-zero” impact on U.S. law. The study by Gilens and Page found that the number of Americans for or against any idea has no impact on the likelihood that Congress will make it law. “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a miniscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”
One thing that does have an influence? Money. While the opinions of the bottom 90% of income earners in America have a “statistically non-significant impact,” Economic elites, business interests, and people who can afford lobbyists still carry major influence.
Nearly every issue we face as a nation is caught in the grip of corruption. From taxation to national debt, education to the economy, America is struggling to address our most serious issues. Moneyed interests get what they want, and the rest of us pay the price.
In this case, the air we breath, the water we depend upon and the sustainability of the land is under attack and in peril.
Shame on this nation for allowing money to destroy us all.
6
This EPA is a direct appendage of the anti-democratic, fascist regime of Putin's puppets. Its director cares not for American children, or for Americans at all. Mr. Pruitt is right to be afraid of the public, whose children he sees fit to murder by poison. The cold-bloodedness of his actions in every decision to roll back protection of our air, water and soil show him to be a contemptuous sociopath unfit for any public office. He bids for the filthiest of polluters, not for public well-being.
4
Great, than let's store these chemicals in WY and under the White House lawn.
3
This latest action by the EPA under pro-oil, pro-chemical, pro-business Scott Pruitt is another proof that the Trump Administration is all about protecting the interests of the oligarchs who run America's industries, and their unfettered ability to make more money. The Trump Administration nakedly acts again and again to destroy the health, welfare, and economic security of the American worker, the American people, and the natural environment and climate upon which all of our lives depend. They are the friends only of the captains of industry, and the deadly foes of all of the rest of us.
2
Not evaluating the possible pollution and health effect in water, land and air. Is totally irresponsible and typical of the contempt for science and reason we are seeing in Trump's America. These are very likely avenues of exposure and contamination. People should show their anger and boycott Dry Cleaners. Their business association lobby and played a role in this dangerous decision.
In the decades to come the few bucks they save will cost the US taxpayer billions in cleanup cost.
1
This policy will have to be reversed in a future administration, because it is absurd. It's completely reasonable to give first consideration to workers' safety. But to leave out the broader public entirely, some of whom are children or have low immune system function, is negligent.
The chemical industry may believe that it achieved a compromise with environmentalists with the 2016 Lautenberg Act. But the current administration's refusal to carry out the law in good faith undermines that compromise.
1
I guess the EPA has decided to drop the 'protection' from their entire mission.
Why bother to exist anymore? Their duty to protect the public has been thrown away almost completely.
Seems as if the agency's sole purpose now is to collect their wages for picking up Pruitt's dry cleaning.
3
Fine. Then I propose big chemical companies relocate their testing facilities and dumping grounds as close to Mar-a-Lago as possible. If everything they release into the air, ground, and water is safe as they say, then Trump should welcome his new clean neighbors.
6
Huh, isn't this the Environmental Protection Agency. Do they know what the environment is? Right now our government agencies are just thumbing their noses at us - taxpayers and the people they are supposed to serve. The only thing that matters is money and big business.
4
My heart goes out to the non-human creatures of the world who are not eligible to vote, but whose lives will be severely impacted and cut short. If they had a voice in our elections, this travesty would not be happening.
3
Sounds like they should just shut down the EPA since with Pruitt in charge it is doing more harm than good.
Why does Pruitt still have a job. It has been shown that he has used his position for inappropriate actions, purchases and used the position to enrich himself. He certainly does not care about public welfare or the environment. Why is he still here?
4
For what it’s worth, these documents outline EPA’s PLANNED approach for evaluating the risks of these chemicals. They are currently accepting public comments on these plans (aka problem formulations) through a link on the EPA’s docket website. If you have a specific comment on these documents, try submitting a public comment!
3
I'm relieved that the EPA will only be focusing on the toxins that most directly hurt Americans. When will they be banning this administration?
3
“... the E.P.A. has in most cases decided to exclude from its calculations any potential exposure caused by the substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water ...”
But wait, isn’t “air, ground and water” the definition of “environment”? Protecting these is the titular mandate of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Our very language is being perverted in service to corporations.
2
The entire US Government, it seems, is for sale.
There is no shame in the Capitol and no one to hold them accountable.
We have to do it in November.
5
"E.P.A. has in most cases decided to exclude from its calculations any potential exposure caused by the substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water . . ."
So that's OK then. So long as (a) I don't eat stuff which has grown in the ground or in the water; (b) try to ignore the air while breathing and find some other way to do it; and (c) drink only red wine (no, that won't work - see (a) above) I should be all right.
A diet of perc will see me out. Can't wait.
1
Archimedes said we could move the world, if we knew where to stand. Turn around, where you are standing?
Where do we stand in faith?
Who are the Blessed?
The children, taken from familia arms of peace and hope; crying, silent, sleep, waiting in lines on our borders for lock-ups of cage wire, and space on title floors.
Internment camps for children taken from their parents, worse than World War Two!
This is how the world's richest country treats the poor, families willing to work, with a demonstrated strength, a generational global work force in their shadows, saying, “we want be--on your team!”
Add players! It's more efficient. It diversifies and builds income. If you integrate the world's best farm workers and food factory production workers, from sea (fishing) to plains (farming), in the American heartland as the global food basket.
Looking for efficiency and extreme scale, where will global food packagers ship? Through the USA!
We have space in rural areas and urban areas. Networks are easy to build.
As West Virginia's Chemical Alliance zone is to polymer and bio-chemical manufacturing and design (its clusters include global top fives), the Mighty Mississippi should be the Pearl River of food.
(Pearl River, China, is a 20 mega-city zone with the world's largest labor/machine-driven GDP.)
These are sensible. global best practices.
Let in a skill set, work force! Highly motivated! And law abiding! They are willing to be arrested and confined, in order to submit their legal request, under US law. Can not our faith--the joy of mercy and forgiveness--our labors feed the world?
Boeing is lowering fuel costs, increasing size and speed. Imagine Brasil, a leading global grower, matched with China consumers. Imagine setting brands and rates for Europe, India, Africa and Middle East, the ten rising Danube States.
Imagine the US as the global food center--in care of health and taste, price, and supply, in change of distribution and regulation.
Admit these workers! Their skill set! Proven integrity! World leaders! The best global labor infrastructure to harvest, package, and ship food, physically, administratively.
The mission: traffic with Mexico is over one billion dollars a day. Build another bridge. Increase the trade! Build another bridge with Canada, too!
Who is Blessed? Those who Show Mercy and receive and distribute the gifts mercy provides. Those who pray. A thankful labor infrastructure, (the pizza guy), a profit and prosperity family work force. Those who do not steal.
The head of the toxic chemical unit was a lobbyist for the chemical industry. Now no analysis will be done on small amounts of a hazardous chemical. The EPA under Trump doesn't want to inconvenience their political allies.
4
Contamination persists long after the original pollution event, as we see in the continuing saga of PCBs in the Hudson. Meanwhile the polluter has been bought and sold, or gone bankrupt, and it's left to the government to pay for the clean up.
And health effects can surface long after the polluter has left, which leaves the government also paying for the cost of healthcare.
If conservatives really cared about smaller, less expensive government, they wouldn't let the chemical industry offload these costs on taxpayers.
But of course, taxpayers don't donate enough to political campaigns to buy legislation to protect their health.
14
Its not like anyone making these kinds of decisions actually lived in Flint, Michigan either. The point being that its easy to lower (or remove) standards when you're not directly affected by them - as most (or all) of these lawmakers have deemed to be their case. In other words - these lawmakers are not impacted by the trickle-down effect of their actions. When immunity to your actions only makes you (or your campaign) wealthier - what's a few lost blue-leaning votes.
7
This is the kind of action by the Trump administration that all media should be clamoring about every single day, not the latest stupid comment from You-Know-Who. Other problems may be solved with the coming elections, but we'll be paying the price for the attacks on environmental regulations for generations.
15
You can call me biased, but my firm belief is that a republican needs to experience cancer in his or her own close circle until realizing that no, money is not more important than your health.
6
John McCain has cancer. Gingrich’s deserted wife had cancer. The real disease for Republicans isn’t organic. Republicans as you point out want power and money. They refuse to take real science into account in the quest for those two goals. Even if an “inner circle” member dies they won’t do anything.
1
It's just another punch aimed at the Obama administration's efforts to protect silly things like air quality, clean water, and the overall effects of toxic chemicals on our environment.
8
Great. Now Pruitt, Trump and all the criminals in the administration can look forward to more toxins in the air, food and water as they eagerly poison their wives, children and the rest of the country. If I get on a plane with Pruitt, he better be in the cockpit because I intend to tell him what I think of him.
8
I will if you will.
2
Meanwhile a small TV production company ( "liberal elite"?) is fined $40,000 for using the wrong kind of paint. The partisan, politicization of this White House is unprecedented, damaging and approaching irreparable.
3
The "No Evnironmental Protection Agency". The Trump Admininstration is a total disaster for environment.
5
Trump and Pruitt's EPA: Making American Gasp Again.
9
The deplorable’s in congress sit back, collect their patronage and smile as we witness the collapse of what was once the symbol of success and freedom to the whole world. All for a buck!
4
If the majority of people are crazy, naturally the minority of sane people appear crazy to them. It's pointless to try and argue any point when coming from a place like that. It's too bad we have no real solid references other than the ones we create ourselves.
Mr. Trump and his administration have declared war on the American people. He is only interested in enriching himself, his "friends" and family members. The Republicans need to lose really, really big in 2018 to send a message to Congress. If that doesn't happen the future is going to be a rough ride.
If you're very wealthy you are probably going to have an easier time no matter which way things go. However there is a Ted talk titled "Beware, Fellow Plutocrats, The Pitchforks Are Coming" you might find interesting.
5
Products approved for use in the US will ALL now have to be retested by every other country before that product, or any other product containing such a product, will be allowed to cross the border.
Just when you thought that the US could not do anything crazier to damage its international reputation, it surprises on the downside.
4
If not protecting air, land, or water, what exactly is the mission of the EPA? Any of our grandkids who survive to read about this era of American history and governance will be rightly appalled at how Americans let Republicans steal their futures from them.
2
So, what this all means is that we will ignore all the potential health hazards. Because, that will no longer be an issue. People can fall sick. They can die.
There will not be any questions asked.
"The Chemical Industry Scores a Big Win at the E.P.A.
We can no longer say - Let sanity prevail.
“After rigorous testing, we have determined that these chemicals can be safely exposed to the vacuum of space and therefore are approved for industrial usage.”
Elections have consequences, this is what Americans voted for. In fact, almost 90% of Republicans think Trump and his administration are doing a great job MAGA. Any story stating that pollution and hazardous chemicals are are harmful to your health is really just a Chinese plot to cripple America.
3
The incredible thing is his supporters will almost unanimously approve of this type of thing. (unless, of course, you told them that Obama did it.)
1
No one questions that elections have consequences. Thankfully, we have the media to report those consequences, expected or otherwise, to the public.
1
It used to be that we could consider our drinking water safe no matter where we were in the country. Now we have to be concerned that our water is safe. Those who fish have to be concerned if the fish is safe to eat. Bioaccumulation and bio concentration will be more imporatnt in our thinking because we cannot assume the EPA has been safe guarding our waterway and lakes. So much for progress and our new motto shoudd be the old slogan from DuPont, Better living through chemistry.
2
I think that it is time to get over our outrage. This president has exceeded any expectation for a negative impact on our lives. It is extraordinary and it is not going to change any time soon. The motivation is greed and bigotry and it appears to be rampant and it appears to be well-financed and well-armed. This lib prog accepts some responsibility. I really could not fathom the depths to which we are descending and the naivete that would enable the descent.
4
External cost
Executive Order 12866
We can afford anything as long as someone else pays for it.
Another profit center?
Surely there will be legal challenges to this.
4
Yep - see the last paragraph of the article.
1
As I understand since the EPA will no longer evaluate the impact of a chemical "substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water', there is no longer an Environmental Protection Agency, it is instead an IPA or Industrial Protection Agency.
19
Kudos to NYT for breaking this story. Unfortunately the recent bipartisan amendments featured a trade for health based assessment (without undue weight to economic considerations) giving up State rights to establish more protective exposure standards. US EPA is undermining the very meaning and efficacy of health standards. Nevertheless, the implementation as described by this article indicates it may be contradicted by NEPA, which is an opening for NGOs and State AG offices to file suit. perhaps we should organize an independent "Citizen Environmental Protection Agency" to be a "shadow EPA" which would provide bottom up cooperative environmental governance with protocols and evidence based science assessments.
5
The EPA can "better protect human health and the environment by focusing on those pathways that are likely to represent the greatest areas of concern to E.P.A." It's clear that the "greatest areas of concern to the EPA" no longer include any concern for the environment. Why else refuse to look at the effects of chemicals on the environment, and only focus on issues already monitored by OSHA? Makes perfect sense if you accept that the organization is now actually the Environmental Exploitation Agency.
9
I am eternally gratefull that I am no longer living in a country with such obvious disregard for public health and the environment.
I am also very sorry that it is even possible to take there decisions in a modern democracy without public uproar.
I am saddened that one administration can undo so much of the progress we have seen in environmental awareness with sheer ignorance, stupidity and greed as motivation.
Enough about me; coming generations will look back at this in disbelief and disgust, let’s hope it will not be to late.
8
An absolute outrage.
EPA: you can't take it with you—those high-prestige jobs and salaries. When you're on your deathbeds, do you think you'll feel peaceful about the fact that you helped make the country sicker?
Where are your consciences?
10
Thank you, you little creep and all the creeps that enable you. This is great news for the chemical industry. By the time we start seeing the negative results of this, Pruitt and his ilk will have thankfully left this world.
10
Will someone in Congress please begin impeachment proceeding against Pruitt. In addition to his "swampiness", acknowledged by a republican, he should be impeached for dereliction of duty. Will citizens eventually harmed by his incomprehensible policies or lack enforcement be able to sue the government for damages to health? it's time to get rid of this clown.
11
It seems that the only purpose of the EPA under Trump is to allow Pruitt to enrich his wife, live large and have a good time on the taxpayer's dime. Shameful.
10
TRUMP MAKES AMERICA GREAT AGAIN By greatly increasing the pollution to the national environment, placing the lives of many millions of citizens at risk due to their being poisoned, by letting the chemical industries off the hook. If you want to see what's going to happen, look at the case of Flint, Michigan, where the city administration decided to save money by letting the water supply run unfiltered through the pipes, sending filth, contamination and toxins into the homes of all its residents. Trump has escalated that war on US citizens from a municipal threat to one that is nationwide. Those who voted for and support him are just as much at risk as those who opposed and oppose him. I'm OK with his having a hog wallow comprised of an industrial hog farm sized lake of manure for hos pleasure, fun and enjoyment. But when he spreads the filth from Sea to Stinking Sea, I say NO! Does he not realize that he is condemning himself and his family to be subject to these poisons just the same as the rest of us? He goes way beyond the evolution deniers to the deniers of poisons. Trump believes, with his magical thinking, that if he says that something is not dangerous it becomes safe, by the magic of his thoughts.
11
Tomorrow;s headline: The EPA renamed to the PPA: the Polluters Protection Agency.
12
Wait a minute. Something wrong with this picture. Does this mean that Trump supporters and the Republican Party don't care about their health nor whether their children and families are poisoned by this reckless legislation? Are they all brain dead?
13
Yes. Yes they are.
5
another feather in your cap, Scott Pruitt. but we, the people, won't forget...
9
Don’t these jerks (and their families) who are doing away with these protective regulations have to drink water, breathe the air and eat food grown in the ground? Are we on our way to the creation of dystopian wasteland? HELP!!!!
13
Absolutely disgustingly irresponsible to the people!!
4
Pure, regressive, greed and evil.
4
Poisons for everyone. Thanks, GOP.
6
If all these chemicals are safe, I'm sure Mr. Pruitt and his ilk would be comfortable with us storing waste products in their garage, right? Crooks.
14
I wonder how Pruitt would feel if the swamp he lives in had all these chemicals in there with him and his family. He and his aversion to all things good gets more pathetic by the day. It’s a race to the bottom for this entire administration. So much losing. So much losing.
7
Let the poisons flow. Let the air be polluted and the water burn. American greed
4
I am outraged that the Trump Admin would narrow or handcuff the way the EPA looks at the risks of toxic chemicals. Why don't they just send us the Jonestown Kool Aid and get it over with?
6
Sounds like another dirty deal by Pruitt. How much did he get paid to do the chemical industry’s bidding this time? It’s unconscionable and disturbing to even read this article. When will this administration be gone? They are all crooks and liars, from Trump on down!
9
'The Chemical Industry Scores a Big Win at the E.P.A.' ? How can this title be allowed to happen'? 'Scores a Big Win'!!
Next title will be 'ICE succeeds in murdering hundreds of citizens through approval of new test of Crowd Control Gas at the anti-Trump rally'
10
Absolutely disgraceful.
10
Figures the Trump administration doesn’t care about the environment or the citizens of this country. Corporations want to monetize, and capitalize, and profit from the misery and health issues that will surely be a result of the misguided roll back of EPA protections. But you can’t monetize, or profit from polluted air, water, or the land. While the members of the GOP and the people that run these corporations run away to the Hamptons or to some other rarefied space where they feel above us, the working class, the poor, our children. The people who will surely suffer the health effects of the random dumping of chemicals.
What these idiots fail to realize, is if you pollute the air, water, and the land with chemicals it won’t matter where you live, whether it’s the Hamptons, or in Arkansas, once chemicals leach into the ground, food stuffs that are grown, corn, wheat, etc absorb those toxins then in turn into the ground water supplies, and soon no matter where you live, or what your status is in our social order, even in the rarified air, and at the butler served dinners of the rich, and titans of corporate America, they too will be victims of their own folly
10
I realize you are using hyperbole to make your point, but as someone who lives in the Hamptons we have plenty of environmental degradation here - high ozone levels in the air we breathe, global warming leading to a plague of tick-borne diseases, crashing shore bird and other bird populations, as well as chemical pollution of ground water from various sources. So as you correctly point out, no place in the world is immune.
3
Pollute the swamp.
7
Good Old Scotty Pruitt is having a ball. He's busily fulfilling the orders of his money masters - and laughing about it.
This man needs to be hung by his thumbs until the weight of his demented ego kills him.
Every day I ask myself what causes a person to want to destroy a government? Why?
It boggles the mind. These people are sick, sick, sick. They would try to destroy OUR lives "for the fun of it".
WE THE PEOPLE must DEMAND that all the Robber Baron operatives who have taken over OUR United States of America governments at all levels - and especially their money masters - be purged from OUR governments and taxed out of existence.
They are 3rd rate, inherited/stolen wealth fools.
21
Why go through the facade of even having a government agency with the mission statement of protecting human health and the environment? Instead of using the EPA to destroy our environmental protections, why not simply shut down the EPA. At least that would deprive Pruitt, its most corrupt administrator in the agency's history, of a tax-payer funded job and the self-dealing he has so blatantly engaged in.
5
`... exclude from its calculations any potential exposure caused by the substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water ...'
If the earth were a child, these people would be charged with abuse. Shameful.
3
The EPA's new policy strains common sense. But we should ask whether it blatantly flouts the law, *or, alternatively,* whether sloppy Congressional language left legal wiggle room for the EPA's wiggling.
Is Congress an accessory to this environmental administration crime? (I don't know: *qualified* individuals plese comment.)
1
If we could grant a patent on ridiculousness to the EPA! Chemicals in the environment, both man-made and natural (in concentrations exceeding that found in nature) are the responsibility of the EPA. How can they consider toxic effects if they don't include the routes of common exposure: by breathing, drinking, or ingesting??!
Yes, high concentration skin contact is a very important worry, but these are the concerns of NIOSH and OSHA, since the workplace is the main location where humans may be exposed to hazardous materials.
Oh, Scott Pruitt, you can rest assured that your moisturizing lotions are tested for safety by the FDA. Do your job and focus on the environment!
1
Get ready for a rise in cancer rates again.
1
The United States is over and out. The corporate coup de tat over the last several decades complete.
3
Who wants to start a GoFundMe page to raise money to obtain a home in a Brownfield location that can have several used mattresses from a Trump Hotel and fill the refrigerator with water from Flint Michigan.
2
In three words, "Love Canal Disaster."
2
Why lie? This EPA should just say
"Yeah, we are a bunch of monumental incompetent near-criminals who are trying our hardest to run your country into the ground for our profit"
This way we all can skip all these painful quotes where they pretend they are actual ethical human beings doing their jobs.
4
The administration is killing Americans. Slowly, but they still have a lot of time in office. Let's change that.
2
I thought the reason we have an EPA was to protect our water and air? Isn't the ENVIRONMENTAL Protection Agency, not the WORKPLACE Protection Agency?
4
Keeping the federal government out of health care dovetails with this rollback of toxicity standards.
Precautionary regulation of the chemical industry is SOP in Europe; we are moving back into the post-WWII chemical bath that has impacted the lives of millions. The EPA has moved slowly to tighten the regulations, that though weak, were better than this illegal policy shift...
... can the existing laws be ignored?
3
Let's give the current E.P.A. a more suitable name, the Environmental Pollution Agency.
3
Actually, this has always been an appropriate name for the agency. It is where polluters go to get permission (permits) to pollute. I've written, applied for, was regulated by, and actually enforced these permits during my career.
The difference now is that only the polluters have a say, instead of many stakeholders having a vote as well as a seat at the table.
This is what happens when big business and it's money is allowed to corrupt and take over our electoral political process, and once it's stooges are placed in positions of power within the government by bought politicians, they proceed to dismantle the ability of the regulatory agencies to hold to account their masters when they threaten the well being of the commons.
1
The cynical calculations of the Republican Party endanger the lives of us all. EPA risk assessment is designed to protect the public from the lethal impact of chemicals that should not be in our air, water and food supply nor in the ground and environments in which we move yet, money and politicians purchased by affluent and influential campaign donors pay off legislators elected to protect us each and all. Our democratic representational mode of governance is designed to shield ALL Americans from the predatory misconduct of industry. The election of Trump with his cohorts in Congress claiming to be a Christian Nation are deceitfully and cruelly and criminally endangering our health and the lives of our children exposed to unregulated environmental toxins. Republicans, our President and his Cabinet and our governmental agencies and members of Congress are now cruel frauds willing to kill our children for profit by exposing them to unregulated polluters.
2
Let’s call this what it is: A license to incrementally poison Americans through channels we expect to be clean and safe. I guarantee none of these EPA appointees or chemical industry titans would accept such risks for themselves. Instead, they’ll be using the spoils to ensure a deeply perverse environmental NIMBYism. Grifters indeed.
6
The Trump administration, after “heavy lobbying……”
Heavy lobbying sounds like code for “boat loads of money” in Politicians’ campaign funds and support. One might suspect these elected politicians’ goal is to make the US a bankrupt, Superfund Site, costing tens-of-trillions to clean up! Who will pay for the clean up?
It feels like the US has the worst government money can buy!
It a big victory for the chemical industry, a massive defeat for mankind.
We must find a way to hold self-interested and self-enriching Politicians and their staffers, from both parties, personally liable, responsible and accountable for the lies they have told US, their gross mismanagement of our county, our $21T and growing national debt (106% of GDP), and approximately 80T in future, unfunded liabilities jeopardizing our economic and national security, while benefiting themselves, their party, and special interest donors.
http://www.usdebtforum.com
2
I've spent my life cleaning up after corporations, the military, and our government. We learned this lesson long ago. Corporations (and the military and our own government lackeys) can't be trusted to do the right thing. We must regulate them or they will do irreparable damage to the environment we all depend on. Believe me, I've seen a lot of horrible sites that have led to horrible deaths and debilitating illnesses.
6
The EPA does not even understand the title of its organization. A ghoulish nightmare, were it not deadly real.
3
The Pro Cancer party continues to do the bidding of its corporate pay masters, at the expense of our children , grand children and subsequent generations. What next, adding lead back to gasoline and paint?
6
This has to be stopped by the voters, immediately. The Republicans are cultivating consumer blindness and selling it to the industries who need their buyers oblivious and stupefied.
3
The only surprise is that the New Swamp in Town hasn't yet disbanded EPA.
1
welcome to the next multi-billion dollar cleanups paid for by taxpayers.
7
yup, yet another case of privatizing the gains and socializing the losses. this must STOP.
The EPA is now just the A. To pretend that it is actually Protecting the Environment is a travesty and a tragedy for all the denizens of this planet.
3
This is insane! The damage will last for decades from this decision. It just further proves how little a consumer, sorry I guess I mean citizen means when comparing them to some easy cash. Time to start writing more letters
4
When will this madness end!?
Are we to sit by and watch the collapse of our society and social norms while lobbyists, not the American people, determine our fate?
We must reform Citizens United and term limits and get out and vote in November. We cannot accept this administration. We are under toxic leadership.
6
Just rename it the Environmental Pollution Agency.
5
When I read stuff like this I can't help but wonder how humans are going to go extinct. Will it be the oceans, choking on plastic, rising and becoming more acidic? Will it be our finite fresh water supply becoming a swirling pool of toxicity and cancer? will it be poison soil that no longer produces corn for our breakfast cereal? Will it be catastrophic war? I am not a complete cynic yet, but I'm getting really close. My dear country, why are you doing this? It feels like part of this republic is literally gleefully cheering for its demise.
6
While we fuss over pens, mattresses and phone booths the EPA under Scott Pruitt slowly and methodically is taking actions that make life more dangerous and further degraded our environment. Thanks a lot Trump voters.
6
YFJ The pens & phone booths attract attention because Pruitt's actions regarding them may be actionable, whereas he's actually **allowed** to wreck the planet because he's in charge of environmental policies.
1
Anytime you bring dry cleaning into your home you’re also introducing the chemical into the air of a closed environment (think urinating in a fish tank) and are exposing yourself, your children, and pets to breathe and rebreathe the chemical. Caution should be considered with any household item that aerosol, burn, or off-gas indoors. Just because you can’t see it or it dilutes into the surrounding air doesn’t mean it’s not there and prolonged exposure will lead to some sort of health issue.
It seems the EPA is willfully confused of its function and is overlapping the province of the FDA. Chemicals found in cosmetics are grossly overlooked in this country, while proving certain chemical combinations are causing health issues is only recently being examined. Toothpastes, shaving creams, deodorants, and sunscreen are just a few of the products the FDA defines as cosmetics. The American people are woefully myopic of the dangers posed by prolonged chemical exposure. Remember that your indoor environment is also “an environment”, one I propose the EPA should take more of an interest in protecting. As an example how pervasive the problem is, the environmental working group database skindeep lists over three hundred cosmetic products, available on pharmacy shelves, that contain C8 (a carcinogen found everywhere).
What truly needs examining are the synergistic effects of these everyday chemicals on both the environment and health, not a limited examination of a select few chemicals.
1
Since you can't rely on the EPA, consumers themselves need to get smarter, in some cases there are better, safer, alternatives - sadly I can't find a provider in my area.
https://homeanddry.biz/5-reasons-why-you-should-wet-clean-not-dry-clean/
At least we'll be able to obtain plenty of swamp water from Washington.
I just don't understand how people can care so little about others, so ruthlessly disregard the safety and future of even their own progeny. It is profane.
5
Are they out of their minds?? Do they think they will be immune, unlike the majority, from the deadly effects??
6
So... The air, ground and water are no longer part of the environment (the E in EPA) ??
2
The Lorax weeps.
3
This is the real cost of Trumpism: While we and the media are hypnotized by his nonstop and outrageous antics, various special interests are manipulating Congress and agencies to advance their agendas, no matter what the cost to public health, welfare or safety.
12
Just because it's legal to destroy the environment doesn't mean companies have to destroy it. It is a business decision. Our political power may be diminished but consumers, en masse, have greater economic power than lobbyists. Companies must pay a price for decisions that diminish us. Boycott is the next wave of protest.
25
Too many people are ignorant and/or don’t care.
3
“Who cares if Americans die, get sick and have birth defects ? Think of the profits !”
Greed Over People 2018
“Drop dead, America !”
November 6 2018
Vote !
144
Ph so correct!
3
Sure, Socrates, we can go back to living in caves when there were no chemicals whatsoever and live to the ripe old age of 25. Then you'd be complaining about that.
John Doe...enjoy your unregulated chlorpyrifos and glyphosate in your food, sit back, relax and enjoy the human cancer.
1
Here is the EPA mission statement. Read it all (short) but look at the first three items:
The mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment.
EPA works to ensure that:
Americans have clean air, land and water;
National efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available scientific information;
Federal laws protecting human health and the environment are administered and enforced fairly, effectively and as Congress intended;
Environmental stewardship is integral to U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;
All parts of society--communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments--have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;
Contaminated lands and toxic sites are cleaned up by potentially responsible parties and revitalized; and
Chemicals in the marketplace are reviewed for safety.
71
I guess that was then... it certainly isn't Pruitt's mission now!
4
Yeah, that was then, back when that left-wing radical Nixon was in power, who established the EPA in the first place....
"Conservatives" have fallen so far...
In this case, the E. in E.P.A stands for "E-only if someone touches this stuff directly." By the same logic, they wouldn't research the effects of secondary smoke. The very manner in which they are operating is so skewed it is in itself toxic. I look at this quote in particular:
"The agency can “better protect human health and the environment by focusing on those pathways that are likely to represent the greatest areas of concern to E.P.A.,” said the spokesman, Jahan Wilcox."
No. The agency can better protect human health and the environment by focusing on those pathways that are likely to have the greatest impact on our environment and our citizens.
If there are laws that provide the agency the capability to regulate chemicals in the environment, why is this limited scope update even necessary? (Unless the plan was for less regulation.)
Please remember in November that while our president has us looking out of every window in our home, others he hired are undermining the foundation.
12
That makes a lot of sense. It's called the Environmental Protection Agency, why bother to look for the harmful effects of chemicals in the environment.
12
The fact that these industries put their own profits ahead of the lands and livelihoods of millions across the globe is, sadly, not news to anyone. But how do the billionaire chemical industry executives and corrupt lobbyists at the Environmental "Protection" Agency think they're going to protect their *own* families and descendants from the pollution these chemicals cause? All the earth's oceans are connected. You can't put borders on the air. While the Trump Administration allows their greed and disregard for life to go unchecked, it allows them to destroy the only world we have.
39
They will live in bubble, gated communities with extraordinary privileges, like good air and drinkable water. They will have greenhouses to grow organic produce. The masses, outside, will be clawing at their own throats and dying of the toxins introduced by the Kochs and Pruitt and the like.
7
It seems they are building bunkers in New Zealand.
5
This is one of the most horrifying things I have heard -- in an era of daily horrifying news. People who approve policies like this appear to have no moral core -- and they certainly don't understand science. Can we PLEASE get rid of the whole lot of them?
119
I really don’t understand average Republicans how, when the hear of what’s going on they can support these policies. It’s truly mind boggling to me.
21
Hope everybody is setting aside their tax-plan "windfalls"; cancer treatment copays can be pretty hefty.
83
Since Trump announced lower drug prices, at least 2 cancer drugs have gone up $1000 a month in price.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/08/two-weeks-after-t...
1
"...the E.P.A. has in most cases decided to exclude from its calculations any potential exposure caused by the substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water..."
So what exactly does the E stand for in EPA? If it isn't concerned about air, ground or water pollution, what environment are they "protecting"?
My guess is that the E stands for "Economic", since there seems to be so much economic benefits for the polluters these days.
When Nixon starts looking like a Greenpeace volunteer and G.W. Bush starts looking like an Oxford (MS) scholar, you know something's gone askew...
52
So, where are we heading as a country?
Companies make profits selling goods that contaminate the ground, water and air and now there will be zero cost of doing that?
All because of a political connection strengthen with money?
We are headed into the gutter......
34
If the EPA will not protect the air, ground or water from toxic chemicals, just what has it's mandate become? What other "environment" do we have?
30
The Alternative Environment Protection Agency! Has a nice ring to. Make America Dumb Again, even better.
3
I haven'tread the article, just the headline. But this Trump administration is undermining the very air we breathe, the water we drink, and the fields in which our food grows. Instead of dissing Scott Pruitt for his habits of elitism, can we just say he is undoing all the EPA stands for.
This America First stuff is cover for Big Oil, Big Pharma, and Big War. It appeals to America's worst instincts. Bannon calls it economic nationalism, but what it really is is keeping the countries of the world from coming together for the common good.
Wake up, people.
24
How do citizens protect themselves now that the EPA is no longer the Environmental Protection Agency?
25
The EPA has become a front for Industry. Under Scott Pruitt and this administration, the health and well being of our citizens and people the world over is being relegated to the proverbial back burner. Industry has been the cause of millions of deaths over the decades with un-curtailed abilities to dump harmful chemicals into our water ways, the air and into our foods. Under the guise of promoting economic growth by "easing" regulation, the EPA is eliminating common sense constraints on industries that have caused immense harm to our planet.
11
Donate and Vote. Donate to environmental groups that are fighting back.
These chemicals cause Cancer and other diseases.
What a disaster for our environment and health.
25
So what, exactly, are they going to look at? The amount of money transfered into their bank accounts, perhaps?
21
Clearly, I haven’t been paying attention. When did they change the name to Chemical Protection Agency?
41
Sandy, it's the Economic Protection Agency.
What a mess your country is becoming.
2
The GOP serves the wealthy elite, period. The only thing new is that their base now doesn't seem to care how openly, brazenly and corruptly this agenda is pursued.
20
If this agency won't do it's job, it's up to citizens to push back on the companies that use these chemicals. If you can connect the dots, like with your local dry cleaner, for example, let them know that in the absence of meaningful oversight you have no other option than to stop using their services. It will require some effort on our part, and it's an inconvenience to be sure, but our only voice as consumers is to stop consuming from the industries that are benefiting by these egregious decisions. How we spend our money is how we vote on what exists in the world.
18
Unbelievable.
On the first Earth Day in 1970, I walked the neighborhood of a small Chicago suburb handing out mimeographed sheets describing the problems caused by “pollution”. They had become newsworthy, all of it bad news.
In one of his more admirable acts, Richard Nixon formed the Environmental Protection Agency later that year.
Now, as I watch Donald Trump and his footsoldiers erase the legacy and hard work of so many people, I’m reminded every other generation is doomed to re-learn an important lesson of history. Until we’re forced to suffer the devastation wrought by environmental pollution - again - we somehow seem to think it wasn’t as bad as we were told it was.
32
Air and water don’t respect property lines or personal space, and so can carry pollution, including poisons, on to the properties and into the bodies of even, heaven forbid, rich Republicans and their children. But as long as it’s just other people getting poisoned and sickened who cares? After all, profits must be made.
53
So, let me see if I understand this: essentially the EPA has decided that its function is to be concerned about human chemical exposure as long as the chemicals in question are not found in the “environment,” which would be a scenario that is of no concern to the agency.
So, can we expect that the next step will be renaming the agency the “Protection Agency?” If so, that name seems quite fitting with some of the associations that immediately spring to mind when I think of the name “Trump.”
26
This is what happens when you exclude scientific experts from forming policy on a scientific problem, and leave Mr. Burns of The Simpsons in charge of environmental policy.
103
special interests and old economy wins again. Any company that thinks winning this way ensures long term, stable growth is kidding themselves. Only innovation and new ideas offer opportunity for shareholders.
12
The leaders of these companies don't care at all about long term growth. They care about how much they can pump the stock price each quarter. They'll know far sooner than the public when it is time to dump, then they will walk away richer while everyone else is left with the consequences.
Modern American economics used to be called piracy.
10
There are international agreements covering transboundary pollution of air and water. and the EPA would do well to arrange its regulations in a manner that respects these agreements. We don't need a war over environmental toxins similar to the one the US generated over trade. No-one comes out ahead, or in this case even alive. There comes a point where corruption kills, and that cannot be undone.
17
If it wasn't somehow obvious before, it has become official: the EPA is now bought and paid for. For anyone who believes that environmental pollution is one of the leading causes of chronic disease due to toxic overload, this is one sad day. I wonder how Scott Pruitt would feel if someone start dumping toxins near his home. There is one way to find out.
165
Your question reminds me of a “fun fact” that I like to share with my environmental policy students. Not many years ago, Rex Tillerson (then Exxon CEO) filed suit to block an installation of a fracking operation in the neighborhood of his Texas McMansion. I use the NY Times article as my reliable news source. Check it out!
26
Let's do it. What's the address?
9
The fabric of America’s is unraveling, thanks to Murdoch, republicans, the Mercer family, Fox News, and Donald trump. How far we have fallen.
227
These ladies chemical industry lobbyist are human beings subject to the same forces of nature and dependent on the same essentials of existence as everyone else. Polluted air, land and water make people sick and die prematurely. Congratulations to them for poisoning their own families.
4
The scary part is that we complain, but all we can do is watch as the Trump crime family continues the unraveling calling it an accomplishment and as his base of deplorables cheer him on.
4
"...the E.P.A. has in most cases decided to exclude from its calculations any potential exposure caused by the substances’ presence in the air, the ground or water..."
Well why bother, fer cryin' out loud!
The EPA is no more.
65
As we know from reporting in this very publication, that has been Pruitt's aim since his days as AG in Oklahoma--when he regularly sued the EPA (on behalf of his oil company pals.)
It is why he was chosen to "head" the EPA.
2
The EPA now exists to help Scott Pruitt make insider deals or take pay offs and pick up his dry cleaning and toothpaste.
1
What happened here is that the chemical industry went to the Expensive Pricey Agency and dropped off a load of cash for Pruitt so he can continue to flood the swamp.
21
This is total insanity! Under trump, the EPA is being turned upside down into an agency that protects polluters instead of the public and the environment.
Trump must go! ASAP!
142
Trump* is a mere pustule. Pence is the pustule-in-waiting.
Oligarchs and oligarch-enabling voters - there's the cancer.
9
Special thanks to Jill Stein, and her Green Party voters.
117
An easy scapegoat, but likely not a factor. She also paid for a recount that would have favored Hillary, which the courts shut down before it could be completed (sound familiar?) Personally I think we need more than a 2 party system, but I agree that in this last election the stakes were too high.
https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2016/11/11/13576798...
11
I voted for Clinton, but instead of blaming Stein voters, perhaps we should blame people who did not vote at all or who voted for Trump.
25
RP,
More Democrats voted for Trump than Stein. Before you blame another party, why don't you think about why your own party votes against itself.
Your safe candidate couldn't beat the least popular presidential candidate in polling history. Stop blaming others for your loss.
Meanwhile Clinton worked to expand fracking, which pumps deadly chemicals straight into the ground and causes earthquakes.
It was you centrist Democrats, constantly retreating, passing Republican policy, taking blame for Republican policy, and attacking the very voters you blame for not voting for you that gave us Trump.
As soon as the Democrats stop compromising with the greater evil, and expecting people to for for the lesser evil (worst slogan ever) then people will start voting for Democrats again.
Meanwhile centrist Democrats are still voting for Republican legislation and budgets including a 25% increase in military spending and a known torturer to be head of CIA, making Trump more popular
No one owes Democrats a vote. Candidates have to give reasons to vote FOR them, or lose.
In a two party system, the two parties are supposed to advocate for opposite positions THEN compromise in the middle. Centrist Democrats start with compromise, then call for capitulation. Nobody votes for lesser evil doormats who give away their principles before negotiations start.
Centrist Democrats made Trump possible.
22
In case anyone needed a reminder, this is why Trump forgives all of Pruitt’s transgressions.
42
Perfectly placed article in conjunction with Paul Krugman's opinion piece, also in today's New York Times. If this is not proof positive the Mr. Pruitt is the puppet of the polluters, nothing is.
61
And "the president" thinks Pruitt is doing a fine job! They are both as toxic as what they are doing!
6
The EPA was created to protect rivers, drinking water and air. Right? Are we missing something here? This is what happen when policies on the environment are practically decided by lobbyists and not science people.
396
No, not missing anything. Pruitt was put in the EPA to do one job: Destroy the EPA. He and his chemical buddies could not care less about people or the environment. To them the ONLY goal is profit. And naturally all companies want to externalize all their costs - including those involving killing people with chemicals and destroying the environment. They would rather have people die - ie, paying the cost - than prevent that - which cost them money. Always remember: Republicans HATE people getting in the way of profits. They would literally rather have the people die than give up ANY profits. This is the end result of that philosophy. Trumpers - are you paying attention AT ALL?
25
If EPA took this approach with DDT, there would have been no consideration of impacts of this chemical on bald eagles or other species beyond agricultural fields. If this approach was applied to chloroflourocarbons, the impact of these chemicals on the ozone layer would have never been considered. The result would have been loss of species and devastation in the southern hemisphere due to UV-b exposure.
This is ignorance-by-design, and it demonstrates the intellectual dishonesty and corruption of the Trump Administration.
295
More than "ignorance," but definitely reflective of intellectual dishonesty and corruption.
21
An "Environmental Protection Agency" - which decides that toxins in the environment are not its purview... well isn't that something. What's next? The National Park Service will no longer take care of Parks.
None of this is a surprise, of course. But the criminals - who've been lurking around for years - have become so brazen. It's infuriating.
Everybody at the EPA who still believe in the importance of safeguarding the Environment should resign on masse in protest.
Oh, say, can you see...Can't you see? Why won't you see? USA - open your eyes.
268
Resignation is not the answer. Resistance is more effective from the inside.
31
Yes. McGloin, because if all the career employees resign--those who are truly dedicated to protecting the environment--then Trump and Pruitt will replace them with their toadies who will gleefully pursue the course of destroying the environment. At the EPA and all government agencies that are currently under siege, I would hope that truly dedicated civil servants will hold their ground until this madness finally comes to an end!
1
Now, now, the mission of the National Park Service is to ensure corporate america is not restrained from profiting from the national parks. Obviously. Don't misrepresent their mission!
11
I have a friend at the EPA. She says it's as off the lights have been turned out. The only direction they get from above is what not to do. Everything they do, even routine things they have always done, and even visiting schools to talk about pollution now has to be documented and signed off on, slowing down everything.
Moral is at an all time low. Career employees are retiring, quitting, getting forced out, or assigned to busy work, well below their pay grade.
Public employees swear to "faithfully execute" the laws of the land. Under Trump's direction the head of the EPA, Scott Pruit is doing the opposite of faithfully executing the law, and distracting from that fact with constant corruption and abuses of power.
246
This is a nice juicy fat soluble chemical. Its ideal target the the uninformed and totally indifferent Trump voter. When the cancer and damage hits they won't have health insurance to boot.
13
I have a dear friend at the EPA too. She is a scientist specializing in water quality. She has told me that in the past she routinely turned down big corporations that would approach her for jobs because many treat the environment badly and it wouldn’t sit well with her conscience. Sadly now the EPA is not much better. Morale there is indeed very low.
24
The described events are Exactly what the GOP has wanted for decades. Are we surprised Trump does not care? The whole point of trump was to pull good
Institutions apart and sell our resources to the lowest bidder
18
This is a big step backwards, as if Love Canal never occurred. It will shift the costs of cleaning up problem chemicals to the taxpayer who will be left with a bill in the hundreds of billions of dollars. This is just one more "hidden" tax this administration, so keen on cutting taxes, will impose on us in the future. And, it's not just a concern for those who live next-door to industrial plants. Everyone who lives near a dry cleaner or auto repair shop or mom and pop business using chemicals should pay particular attention to this decision. It will also reduce property values by hundreds of billions as many of these chemicals, once in groundwater, can travel great distances, right to your doorstep. Try explaining that to your realtor when you put your house up for sale.
162
The biggest problem is that pruitt has fired or demoted the scientists & he can't read the reports because they use big words. Maybe someone should write the reports in a "Dick & Jane" type format with pictures.
"See Dick drink the water. See Dick get sick. See Dick die."
Big business saying "who cares".
11
Direct workplace hazards are the jurisdiction of NIOSH and OSHA, not the EPA. The EPA's data on toxicity does provide an important baseline for other agencies, but the point of the EPA is that it has a broad mandate. Restricting the analysis The mission statement of the EPA begins with, "The mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment." Note that: and the environment. I have years of experience working in environmental remediation. Many of the contaminants listed in the first batch of 10 chemicals to be evaluated have well known and pervasive impacts to soil, groundwater, and vapor (air). For example, dry cleaning solvent (PCE) is a very challenging contaminant and is very often (not always, but often) a contaminant in soil and groundwater at dry cleaners. In recognition of the toxicity and mobility of PCE in the environment, California decided in 2007 to ban all use of PCE in dry cleaning by 2023. That the EPA would decide to not look at the environmental impacts of PCE in the new review is abdication of duty. It is possible that they would not decide to ban it, which would be fine if the decision is based on sound science. However, now the recommendations will be unreliable because they are inadequate in scope. Luckily, the way that environmental laws are structured, states are allowed to have stricter laws than the Federal laws. Sadly, this will create a situation in which states with tight environmental laws are at an economic disadvantage.
105
Under the 2016 new TSCA regulations, states are preempted in placing restrictions on existing chemicals on which EPA is currently acting. Reliance on state standards is no longer on option.
4
This is partly true. The federal restrictions do overrun state preemption in some, but not all situations. This explainer from the CA legislative analysts office provides a good summary.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/3504
There is a reason why these chemicals are called "toxic". They kill things that come in contact with them. Of course this administration would like to kill off poor people of not just color but white because they are a drain on the 1%s' profits. There is no longer an America or the EPA that was sworn to protect the citizens from toxic & nuclear waste. It is a take the money & run. These companies & their owner billionaires can afford to move to other countries when the air & water & soil become to dangerous to live in & on. trump was praising pruitt again today for the great job he is doing. SICK!!!
101
All Americans should be outraged by this. Unless you work for the chemical industry, why would you not be for analysis just to SEE if it's harmful, and if so, at what levels. What's the harm in that? Republican voters please wake up, your representatives could be making you sick with these decisions, just because the Chemical Industry has money to throw at them. Republicans, don't you at least have the right to know if something's killing you so then you can choose to be exposed or not?
89
The Trump administration has declared war on Americans through cuts in ACA, poverty programs, and now environmenttal protections from chemicals. The EPA is now open only to businesses. Concerned citizens need not apply.
90