3 ms·

My company is regulated by the EPA, so I was surprised by this statement and sent it to my lawyer to ask why the EPA often asks for tests for my products which

My company is regulated by the EPA, so I was surprised by this statement and sent it to my lawyer to ask why the EPA often asks for tests for my products which are also regulated by TSCA but for which they have no evidence of harm. Turns out it's highly misleading as this statement only applies to chemicals in use before the EPA was setup in the 1970's. Those and naturally occurring chemicals were automatically added to the TSCA inventory (about 70,000 on the list). New chemicals do have to get approved for use. Clearly duponts cover up is egregious, but another way to read the fact that only five have been restricted is that many of the others are safe for their intended use. I can testify that EPA testing is pretty thorough, at least for small companies like mine.

meagain20000 11y ago
I hate to be that cynic but it sounds like you need better conections like Dupont. You are probably not contributing political donations to the right people...etc. etc.
- technotony 11y ago
  Sadly I don't think your cynicism is misplaced. I'm just back from a trip to Washington where the advice we got was essentially setup an industry group and hire a lobbyist. Am curious to see if it makes things easier.
  - Ygg2 11y ago
    It does. In same manner adding more armor on your car and removing the brakes, makes your car faster.
  - rayiner 11y ago
    Setting up and industry group and hiring a lobbyist is not at all the same thing as making wink wink campaign donations. Having done work in the environmental space, I do think the cynicism is misplaced. EPA isn't constrained because of well placed campaign donations. It's constrained because a huge part of the country believes that God literally gave us the earth to use up and considers any environmental regulation to be unamerican. Not to mention that every attempt at regulation is met with the same response: "it'll kill jobs." Do big chemical companies have lots of lobbyists? Sure. Their job is to point out to Congresscritters every bit of uncertainty in the science (of which there is a lot), to reinforce what they already believed. Those companies don't need to make big donations to get their way--they just have to tell Congresspeople how many good blue collar factory jobs they create in their district. It's the environmental groups that really benefit from lobbying.

meagain20000 11y ago

I hate to be that cynic but it sounds like you need better conections like Dupont. You are probably not contributing political donations to the right people...etc. etc.

technotony 11y ago
Sadly I don't think your cynicism is misplaced. I'm just back from a trip to Washington where the advice we got was essentially setup an industry group and hire a lobbyist. Am curious to see if it makes things easier.
- Ygg2 11y ago
  It does. In same manner adding more armor on your car and removing the brakes, makes your car faster.
- rayiner 11y ago
  Setting up and industry group and hiring a lobbyist is not at all the same thing as making wink wink campaign donations. Having done work in the environmental space, I do think the cynicism is misplaced. EPA isn't constrained because of well placed campaign donations. It's constrained because a huge part of the country believes that God literally gave us the earth to use up and considers any environmental regulation to be unamerican. Not to mention that every attempt at regulation is met with the same response: "it'll kill jobs." Do big chemical companies have lots of lobbyists? Sure. Their job is to point out to Congresscritters every bit of uncertainty in the science (of which there is a lot), to reinforce what they already believed. Those companies don't need to make big donations to get their way--they just have to tell Congresspeople how many good blue collar factory jobs they create in their district. It's the environmental groups that really benefit from lobbying.