Is Your State One of the 33 Taking Action on Toxic Chemicals?
By Sarah Doll
Thank goodness for the states.
This year, at least 33 states—more than half the nation—will stand up as defenders of public health.
They are taking the toxic bull by the horns and consider policies addressing the untested and toxic chemicals in everyday products.
Many toys, clothes, bedding and baby shampoo contain some chemicals toxic to the brain and body. We've known for years that the federal law meant to protect us (the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act) is outdated, allowing untested chemicals and known carcinogens, hormone disruptors, heavy metals and other toxics into the products we use every day.
States have established more than 200 policies in the last 10 years to protect people from hazardous chemicals in consumer products.
2014 is proving to continue this tradition of protection: at least 33 states are considering policies on toxic chemicals. Some would change disclosure rules for manufacturers, so that concerned consumers will know what chemicals are in their products. Some would phase out the use of chemicals like bisphenol A, formaldehyde and toxic flame retardants. And just a few weeks into some sessions, momentum is strong—like in Washington State, where a bill is already moving to restrict certain flame retardants.
The chemical industry has taken an aggressive approach, spending millions on lobbying campaigns to crush state initiatives.
But we’ve got their M.O- they'll downplay real dangers, gloss over opportunities to build a greener economy, throw out red herrings, and do all they can to protect the status quo. And behind the scenes, out-of-state chemical industry checks will fill politician pockets.
Don’t believe us? Below is a video from the toxic chemicals lobby:
So it's truly a patriotic moment when lawmakers reach across the aisle and pass a law to protect their people. And it happens: most of the several hundred state toxics policies passed with broad bipartisan support, and bills were signed into law by both Republican and Democratic governors.
As New York State Senator Phil Boyle (R-Bay Shore) said: "It's a 21st century reality: We have the American ingenuity to identify and eliminate hazardous chemicals in consumer products. It's the responsible thing to do for our marketplace, our children and our future."
Highlights of 2014 state policy include:
We expect the following states will consider policy to identify chemicals of concern and/or require makers of consumer products to disclose their use of chemicals.
Some of these policies will include provisions to encourage manufacturers to identify and use safer alternatives in their products:
• New York
Bans on Formaldehyde in children's personal care products are expected to be considered:
• New York
Phase out the use of toxic flame retardants, including chlorinated Tris, in consumer products:
• New York
Restrict or label the use of the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA) in infant formula cans, food packaging, and receipt paper:
• New Jersey
• New York
• South Dakota
• West Virginia
• New Jersey
• New York.
Using less toxic cleaning supplies in schools:
• North Carolina
Considering restrictions on mercury:
• New York
Asking manufacturers to make cosmetics with less toxic chemicals:
• New York
And several states are still determining the best approach for their state (Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico and South Carolina)
Sending a Message
This wave of action, combined with consumer demand, has ripple effects far beyond state boundaries. The policies send a clear message to manufacturers and retailers alike: consumers want to shop with confidence for products that are toxic-free. Wal-Mart, Target and Johnson & Johnson—all have pledged action to remove certain toxics from their shelves and their formulas. Soon we'll see that products can be plentiful and profitable—even without the toxics.
Visit EcoWatch’s HEALTH page for more related news on this topic.
- Thom Yorke of Radiohead Releases Song With Greenpeace to Help ... ›
- Patti Smith, Thom Yorke, Flea and More Featured on Just Released ... ›
- Musicians and Activists Unite at 'Pathway to Paris' - EcoWatch ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
A national park in Thailand has come up with an innovative way to make sure guests clean up their own trash: mail it back to them.
- Supermarkets in Thailand and Vietnam Swap Plastic Packaging for ... ›
- Malaysia Sends Plastic Waste Back to 13 Wealthy Countries, Says It ... ›
- Thailand Begins the New Year With Plastic Bag Ban - EcoWatch ›
- Coronavirus Worsens Thailand's Plastic Waste Crisis - EcoWatch ›
- Marium, Thailand's Beloved Baby Dugong, Is the Latest Victim of ... ›
By Ilana Cohen
Four years ago, Jacob Abel cast his first presidential vote for Donald Trump. As a young conservative from Concord, North Carolina, the choice felt natural.
But this November, he plans to cast a "protest vote" for a write-in candidate or abstain from casting a ballot for president. A determining factor in his 180-degree turn? Climate change.
Fractures Among Young Climate Conservatives<p>While young conservatives have united around the urgency of climate change, they remain divided over how to bring their concerns to the ballot box. Some embrace right-wing <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-attacks-republican-convention/2020/08/24/434e5b46-e66d-11ea-970a-64c73a1c2392_story.html" target="_blank">attacks</a> painting Biden as a "tool of the left" and find his climate agenda "radical." Others can't find a way to justify voting for Trump, even if it means breaking with their party.</p><p>Patrick Mann from Orange County, California, voted for Trump in 2016. But today, he's leading Aggies for Joe at Texas A&M University and is co-founder of Texas Students for Biden. </p><p>Mann grew up watching wildfires ravage his home state, nearly forcing his family to evacuate in 2017. The GOP is failing to "meet the moment" for climate action, Mann said. He's hoping Biden will deliver on a promise to "<a href="https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/caucus/2020/01/06/joe-biden-democrat-president-iowa-caucus-restore-soul-our-nation/2806422001/" target="_blank">restore the soul of our nation</a>." </p><p>Taylor Walker from Pensacola, Florida, is also determined to make her voice heard on climate, including by casting her first-ever vote for president—but not for Biden.</p>
A False Equivalency<p>Young climate conservatives may fear climate denial and delayed climate action, but more than that, they fear the growing political momentum around the Green New Deal, the massive spending it entails and <a href="https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/" target="_blank">Biden's citing of it</a> as a "crucial framing for meeting the climate challenges we face."</p><p>Many don't want to split with their party to support a Democrat whose <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/09/03/757220130/joe-biden-on-bipartisanship-gun-control-and-regrets-over-inaction-after-a-traged" target="_blank">allegedly bipartisan intentions</a> they doubt. If stymieing what they consider a radical green agenda means re-electing a climate change denying president, so be it. </p><p>"I'm scared of climate change, but I'm also scared of the Green New Deal and what it means for America," said Ben Mutolo, a republicEN spokesperson and junior at SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry. </p><p>Mutolo felt encouraged by former Ohio Governor John Kasich's <a href="https://www.rollcall.com/2020/08/17/kasich-speech-to-democratic-convention-follows-years-of-building-conservative-credentials/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">appearance</a> at the Democratic National Convention, but he still struggles to see himself voting for Biden. Though the candidate paints himself as a <a href="https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-08-12/harris-biden-different-generation-similar-political-instinct" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">centrist,</a> Mutolo believes he's "cozying up to the ultra-progressive left." </p><p>Mutolo, who wants to see market-based climate solutions like a carbon tax, feels torn between a candidate whose climate plan relies on taking an "<a href="https://joebiden.com/environmental-justice-plan/#" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">All-of-Government approach</a>," and one with no efforts to reign in global warming at all. <span></span></p><p>Leiserowitz said he appreciated how a conservative might feel Biden's climate plan "doesn't jive with their limited government, free-market approach."</p><p>But he sees a strong distinction between voting for a presidential candidate with a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/us/politics/biden-climate-plan.html" target="_blank">$2 trillion climate plan</a> that includes large renewable energy investments, which have <a href="https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/politics-global-warming-april-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bipartisan support</a>, and a candidate trying "to take the country in the opposite direction, towards more fossil fuels."</p>
- 7 Republicans Joined Senate Democrats in Vote to Fight Climate ... ›
- Climate Change Acknowledged by Increasing Number of ... ›
The World Health Organization (WHO) announced Monday that 64 high-income nations have joined an effort to distribute a COVID-19 vaccine fairly, prioritizing the most vulnerable citizens, as Science reported. The program is called the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility, or Covax, and it is a joint effort led by the WHO, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.
- Trump Denies CDC Director's 2021 Timeline for Coronavirus Vaccine ›
- CDC Tells States to Prepare for a Vaccine Before November Election ›
- Fauci Warns Pre-Pandemic Normalcy Not Likely Until Late 2021 ... ›
By Gloria Oladipo
In the face of dangerous heat waves this summer, Americans have taken shelter in air conditioned cooling centers. Normally, that would be a wise choice, but during a pandemic, indoor shelters present new risks. The same air conditioning systems that keep us cool recirculate air around us, potentially spreading the coronavirus.