**
In a significant move that has raised alarm among public health advocates, a newly proposed bill in the US House of Representatives seeks to dismantle crucial protections against toxic chemicals. This legislation, spearheaded by Republican Congressman Gary Palmer of Alabama, aims to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in ways that could endanger consumers, workers, and the environment alike. As the bill makes its way through Congress, critics warn that it could roll back years of progress in chemical safety oversight.
A Step Backwards for Chemical Safety
The proposed amendments to the TSCA would severely limit the scientific methods used to assess health risks associated with chemicals. Under the new bill, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would no longer be legally obligated to ensure that new chemicals do not pose risks to human health. Instead, the agency would only need to establish that a chemical “probably” won’t harm individuals, a shift that advocates argue could allow hazardous substances to flood the market without adequate scrutiny.
Since its strengthening in 2016, TSCA has been a vital tool for regulating toxic chemicals. However, industry lobbyists have long targeted this legislation, eager to exploit the current political landscape where the Republican Party holds significant power. Daniel Savery, an attorney with the environmental nonprofit Earthjustice, articulated the stakes, stating, “Industry has said it has a ‘historic opportunity’ to revise TSCA, or gut it, as we believe it to be.”
Industry Influence and Scientific Integrity at Risk
One of the most troubling aspects of the proposed changes is the increased role it would afford to industry in the chemical review process. The bill mandates that the EPA consult with chemical manufacturers during the evaluation of new substances, effectively compromising the agency’s independence. If the EPA fails to approve a chemical within 90 days, the agency’s top official must explain the delay to industry stakeholders, creating an atmosphere of pressure that could rush scientific assessments.
Maria Doa, an attorney with the Environmental Defense Fund, emphasised the detrimental impact of these proposed changes, stating, “These were characterized as ‘small changes’, but no, they are fundamental changes that put industry profits ahead of health.” The legislation also limits the agency’s ability to consider cumulative exposure risks from multiple sources, such as air, water, and dermal contact, undermining comprehensive health assessments.
Worker Safety Under Threat
The implications of this bill extend beyond consumer safety; they also jeopardise worker protections. Strikingly, the new legislation would prevent the EPA from enforcing regulations that are stricter than those established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Given that OSHA’s chemical exposure limits are often outdated and inadequate—some as far back as the 1970s—this could leave workers vulnerable to dangerous substances.
For example, the permissible exposure limit for trichloroethylene (TCE), a commonly used dry cleaning chemical, is currently set at a level 500 times higher than what the EPA deems safe. Advocates fear that the bill would entrench these outdated standards rather than allow for necessary updates that could protect workers’ health.
Political Ramifications and Public Response
Despite the potential risks posed by this legislation, the political landscape may complicate its passage. While the Republican majority in Congress presents an opportunity for the bill’s proponents, many in the party are wary of backlash from constituents concerned about toxic chemicals in their communities. As the Maha movement, led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., gains traction, Republicans facing re-election may find it challenging to support a bill that appears to prioritise corporate interests over public health.
Chris Jahn, CEO of the American Chemistry Council, praised the proposed legislation, asserting that it is essential for the chemical industry. “Getting TSCA back on track is critical for American chemistry and for the industries like energy, healthcare, and agriculture that rely on our innovations,” he remarked. However, this perspective overlooks the critical need for safeguarding community health and environmental integrity.
Why it Matters
As this bill moves closer to a vote, the potential consequences for public health and safety remain dire. The dismantling of regulations that protect against toxic chemicals not only threatens individual well-being but also undermines environmental stewardship. The ongoing fight for stronger chemical safety standards is not merely a legislative battle; it is a fight for the health of our communities, our workers, and future generations. As citizens, we must remain vigilant and vocal, advocating for policies that prioritise health over profit in the face of corporate lobbying and political manoeuvring.
