Tag Archives: toxics

California, Environment

Take Action Now — Stop Sacramento’s 11th Hour Assault on Environmental Protection

Take ActionWe need your help! In the last week of the legislative session, polluters may be getting a big gift if last minute legislation is not amended.

Californians can look forward to hazardous waste being “left in place” instead of removed and sent to specially constructed and licensed facilities under last minute amendments to Speaker John Perez’s Assembly Bill 1330. The legislation now calls for meeting environmental targets by “reducing the disposal of hazardous waste.”

That’s like “cleaning up” Prince William Sound by letting Exxon leave oil in the Bay.

Will you help us stop this outrageous power grab by polluters by calling on your legislators for amendments today?

The toxic amendment appears to be the brain child of polluters and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Director Debbie Raphael. The DTSC has been the subject of whistleblower and consumer complaints that it is falling down on the job, but the last minute amendments would let polluters have a pass on cleaning up their pollution. Among the beneficiaries are Boeing, Chevron, KB Homes, Lockheed Martin and Waste Management, all prolific donors in Sacramento.

No doubt major industry players from Boeing – with its radioactively contaminated Simi Valley land – to KB Homes – and their plans to build on radioactive sites next to industrial factories without adequate clean up, are rubbing their hands together. This legislation disposes of the need for disposal, saving them millions of dollars and making official what the DTSC has already been quietly sanctioning.

Waste that is not removed continues to expose the public to toxins via different pathways from breathing it in to ingesting it through food or water.

Please take a minute to weigh in with your state lawmakers and stop this power grab by polluters.

Posted by Liza Tucker, Consumer Advocate and Author of the Golden Wasteland Report. For more information on Consumer Watchdog and our Toxics Watchdog project, follow us online on Facebook and Twitter.

Environment

Why Can’t Regular Citizens Get a Fair Shake in Sacramento?

Bill to change statute of limitations for polluters stalls out

by Brian Leubitz

When people complain about the Legislature, it is precisely because of things like this story from the always interesting California Watch.

Under pressure from construction, architect and other industry groups, state legislators killed a bill that would have closed a loophole used by businesses to evade pollution lawsuits.

Sponsored by Assemblyman Warren Furutani, D-Long Beach, AB 1207 arose out of a lawsuit in Carson, where residents discovered in 2009 that for nearly five decades, their families have been exposed to dangerous levels of cancer-causing toxins emanating from their properties. There is no state law that explicitly puts time limits on pollution cases, which often are discovered decades after the toxic dumping occurs.

However, Shell Oil Co. and a local developer were able to initially get the resident lawsuit thrown out by claiming the state’s 10-year time limit on “construction defect” claims had expired.

It is never hard to kill a bill that can be even tangentially tied to the evil “trial lawyers”. However, in this situation, and many others, lawsuits are the only ramification for Californians who have been well and royally screwed by big companies. This time it was a developer and Shell Oil, but you can trace these same general circumstances to many other cases.

The buyers and renters of homes in Carson simply had no way to know that they were moving into property that was on top of a toxic waste dump. But Shell knew, and at some level, the developers should have known if they did their due diligence. But money comes first, and that didn’t happen because any answers would be inconvenient.

And so a generation later, people in Carson are stuck with toxic property. And somehow there is a statue of limitations for an event that they could have no way of knowing? It is a perversion of the concept of statute of limitations, which is intended to force people to act on situations of which they are aware.

Best of luck to Asm. Furutani and any other legislators who take up this bill. This shouldn’t happen to other Californians. But what this really speaks of is the sheer power of lobbyists and industry in Sacramento. I try to imagine the situation where a majority of Californians prefers this outcome, and I just can’t imagine such a world. No, this was all about moneyed interests against a diffuse sense of right and wrong.

I suppose it shouldn’t surprise much that the money won.

California, Environment

How did your representatives vote on the environment?

California’s clean air and water, pristine coastline, wild open spaces and public health protections don’t happen by accident. They happen because champions for the environment run for office, and once they’re elected, they work to pass laws that protect our natural resources and improve our quality of life.

Today the California League of Conservation Voters released our annual California Environmental Scorecard. The Scorecard is the behind-the-scenes look at the battle to protect the Golden State’s natural legacy and public health, and reveals how the governor and members of the state legislature voted on critical environmental proposals in the 2010 legislative session. Take action and let your legislators know what you think about their 2010 scores: Visit http://www.ecovote.org/

The story of the 2010 Scorecard is as much about how the environmental community stopped multiple attacks on the environment as it is about how we passed strong laws that protect our quality of life. But the story doesn’t end there, because we expect more attacks in 2011 that falsely claim we need to sacrifice the environment in order to improve the economy.

Emboldened by the tough economic climate, anti-environmental legislators introduced dozens of so-called “regulatory reform” bills in 2010 in an attempt to weaken environmental protections. The good news is that, with the help of environmental champions in the state Senate and Assembly, CLCV and our allies successfully defeated the bills that posed the most serious threats to the environment and public health. At the same time, environmental advocates were able to deliver several important proposed laws to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s desk, including bills dealing with energy storage, recycling, water conservation, pesticides, clean energy jobs, and oil spill prevention.

Schwarzenegger’s 2010 score of 56% factored into an average lifetime score of 53 percent over his seven years as governor. The governor received national recognition for leadership on environmental issues. However, he leaves office with a mixed legacy, having championed some issues-notably, bold solutions to climate change-and having proven less reliable on others, including protecting public health and state parks.

How did your legislator perform on the environmental community’s priority legislation to protect the environment and public health? Learn your legislators’ scores and then let them know what you think! (More after the jump).

2010 California Environmental Scorecard Highlights:

Governor Schwarzenegger 56% (leaves office with 53% average score)

Senate average: 59%

Senate Democrats: 91%

Senate Republicans: 6%

Senators with 100% score: 12

Highest Scoring Senate Republican: Blakeslee, 21%

Lowest Scoring Senate Democrat: Correa, 30%

Assembly average: 64%

Assembly Democrats: 94%

Assembly Republicans: 7%

Assemblymembers with 100% score: 30

Highest Scoring Assembly Republican: Fletcher, 19%

Lowest Scoring Assembly Democrat: Huber, 43%

Perfect 100%:

Senators: Alquist, Cedillo, Corbett, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Kehoe, Leno, Liu, A. Lowenthal, Pavley, Steinberg, Yee.

Assemblymembers: Ammiano, Bass, Beall, Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Carter, Chesbro, Coto, de Leon, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Gatto, Hayashi, Hill, Huffman, Jones, Lieu, B. Lowenthal, Monning, Nava, J. Pérez, Ruskin, Salas, Saldaña, Skinner, Swanson, Torlakson, Yamada.

The California Environmental Scorecard is an important tool for environmental voters, who for nearly 40 years have helped CLCV deliver on our mission to hold elected officials accountable to their campaign promises to protect California’s families and natural heritage.

With the introduction this year of a new interactive, online Environmental Scorecard, CLCV is making it even easier for voters to communicate with their elected officials about their environmental performance.

Please know the score and take action today! Visit http://www.ecovote.org/

Blog Roundup, Environment, San Diego, San Francisco

October 15, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

How a Bill Becomes a Law
(or not)

Ba-Da-Bang!


Other Statewide

Local

Federales

The Rest

Environment, Health Care, San Diego, San Francisco

October 12, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. People wrote a *lot* in the last couple days, which means that yesterday was a bad day for me to quit sniffing glue be too busy to put together a roundup. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Oh, Madam Speaker…

Soldiers, Mercenaries,
“Security”

Health Care

Whiskey Is For Drinkin’

Environmment and, um,
Labor

Other Legislation

Local News

All the Rest

Blog Roundup, Environment, Health Care

October 10, 2007 Blog Roundup

Today’s Blog Roundup is on the flip. Not too many posts today, so I left them as is, without categorization. Let me know what I missed.

To subscribe by email, click
here and do what comes naturally.

Uncategorized

The Big Winner This Session? Chemical Manufacturers

16 Comments

The Assembly Session is now over and a special session for health care and water issues has been convened. The Senate is expected to conclude its session soon as well, but not before hashing out a few more obstacles.  Hundreds of bills are headed to the Governor's desk (the Assembly sent 234 before it adjourned in the wee hours).  But, it turns out that money does buy you love if you start astroturf organizations, but not so much for the real grassroots. So, the mothers of MOMS rising and other organizations that have been fighting toxic chemicals that are in our everyday environment will have to keep on fighting.

UPDATE: From the commnts, AB 706 is now officially dead. The vote count was 19 Ayes, 20 Noes, 1 Abstain.  Dems who voted the wrong way: Correa (Orange County), Ducheny (San Diego), Florez (Bakersfield & Fresno), Machado (Stockton), and Vincent (LA…WTF?). Gloria Negrete McCleod abstained. Sen. Yee flipped his vote late last night.  Thank you, Senator.

See the flip for lots more. 

Science is ever-changing, but that doesn't mean we should be ignoring its lessons. What we once thought was “better living” we now know is killing us. Yet we dawdle. And succumb to a few million bucks spent on mailers with deceptive images of firefighters. So, the scorecard on toxic chemicals this session, well, it is a mixed bag. Fiona Ma's bill to ban thalates in children's toys has passed both houses. You can learn more in this video.  But whether it will be signed is seriously in doubt. If I were a cynic, I would say that the idea of a veto is precisely why it was allowed to be passed.

But, there are more failures than successes. And it seems the Senate has a profound interest in killing anti-toxics bills.  You might say that the Senate is Toxic. (Oh man, I am funny!) So, you've heard a lot about AB 706 (here and here, video here), Mark Leno's Bill banning the use of certain fire retardants for furniture sold in the state. The bill passed the Assembly, and the LA Times named it one of its 6 must pass bills. Yet, the Democrats in the Senate (no Republicans are needed) have broken ranks. You see, apparently the millions of dollars the “Californians for Fire Safety” has spent opposing the bill, and protecting their toxic chemical business.  A number of Senators changed their votes from earlier votes in Committee, Most noticeable are two Senators: Senators Florez (D-Bakersfield/Fresno) and Senator Leland Yee(D-SF/San Mateo).

Look, this isn't an issue of left/right. People in red counties respect their firefighters and want to keep them safe too, so the fact that Sen. Florez's district isn't the bluest is not relevant. If citizens are calling their legislators upset about AB 706, perhaps it is because “Californians for Fire Safety” has mislead the public into thinking that firefighters oppose the bill, when in fact, they support the bill. 

Another bill, AB 558 by Asm. Mike Feuer(D-LA), would require the state to build a catalog of toxics, rather than proceeding through regulation one by one.  Again, the bill was endoresed by the LA Times, who said that the program is worthy of support because of its purpost “to shift the focus from controlling pollution — that is, regulating how chemicals are disposed of or emitted — to preventing it by reducing the use of hazardous materials.” Yet, once again, Senators Florez and Yee killed the bill. This time in the Appropriations Committee.  This bill wasn't even granted the courtesey of a floor vote by the two Senators.

Both of these Senators owe their constituents an explanation for their strong defense of the chemical industry over California's families. This is especially true of Senator Yee, my senator, who took over from one of the most consistently good votes in the Senate, Jackie Speier. (If there ever were an argument against term limits, it is Jackie Speier.) But, in the wake of her departure, we fail to protect Californians from toxic chemicals. And the manufacturers are allowed to buy another year to poison our children and imperil our firefighters. The dollar, I fear, proved once again that it is the strongest voice in Sacramento. Of course, as always, if I'm wrong I take criticism in the comments. 

Environment

Environment Denial ain’t limited to Global Warming

1 Comment

(FYI: This bill will be reconsidered on Monday!! – promoted by blogswarm)

The Graduate is a truly excellent movie. If you haven’t seen it, you should.  And in this scene, Dustin Hoffman’s character gets some advice…on plastics.  This has always been what I’ve imagined chemical lobbyists to look/act like.  Except, the throw more money around to Republicans and “ModSquad” Dems (as opposed to GoodSquad Dems, who, you know, support their constituents) who are comfortable denying scientific evidence.

So, which denial am I talking about? Well,  AB 1108, a bill authored by Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (GoodDem-SF) would ban the toxic chemical phthalate, which has already been banned for sale in the City and County of San Francisco. It’s used in, you guessed it, plastics.  Most worryingly, it is used in plastic toys for children.  The scientific evidence is there, but unfortunately, so is the California Chemistry Council. 

But, the bill might come back to the floor, so call your legislator and ask them to vote YES on AB 1108. 11 legislators abstained (see the vote here) and we only need five more YES votes to pass the bill.  Over…

From Capitol Weekly:

The debate over all of these bills often sounds eerily similar to the debate over global warming, with advocates urging quick action, citing scientific proof of pending dangers. Opponents, meanwhile, question the scientific validity of the proponents’ claims and balk at the potential economic impact of new regulations.

Ma said the opposition to her bill, led by the California Chemistry Council, as vigorous because of the precedent her bill may set for other measures pending in the Legislature this year. “I understand the industry feels this is a slippery slope–that once one ban passes, it opens up the floodgates. And other states are looking to California to see what we do. I think this has national implications” for the chemical industry.
***
Supporters of the Ma bill were unmoved by the rationales against the bill. “Legislators do a lot of things that they are not experts on, and they vote on them all the time,” says Environment California’s Dan Jacobson. Jacobson said many members were “hiding behind the chemical industry’s conflicting science.”

Ma said some members were “hiding behind Governor Schwarzenegger’s green-chemistry initiative. But he has no plan, no timetable, no list of chemicals. There’s nothing in it.”

Tim Shestek of the American Chemistry Council says the green-chemistry initiative is “something that we would see as an opportunity instead of these rifle-shot approaches in the Legislature.”

Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-Mountain View, … [said] “The industry says they want a wider, more comprehensive approach. [Last year’s] AB 990 was a wider, more comprehensive approach that would have involved all the interested parties, and they fought that tooth and nail. The chemical industry in California is going to fight these bills. The Legislature has to have the will to overcome that.”

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.  The members of the Assembly need to take the lead on these issues. The state of California needs to take the lead on these issues, because you know the Consumer Products Safety Commission, which is just chock full of manufacturing industry Bush-appointees, isn’t going to take the lead.

Hats off to Asm. Ma, now, let’s help her get those last five votes.