Dow chem

---see DOW 2 age of trump
=<div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/libertarianism-failed-us/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/libertarianism-failed-us/</a></div><div style="font-size: small;">Libertarians have a dream. It is to create a floating colony, either using ships or artificial islands, located in international waters. Residents of these communities would be out of reach of sovereign countries, so they would not be bound by government rules and best of all, they would pay no taxes. It is called seasteading, which is being promoted by the Seasteading Institute.You have to go back to the 1970s for the first serious attempt at seasteading, which was based on the idea that unclaimed island in the Pacific Ocean could be colonized by libertarians.A Nevada-based real estate developer and coin dealer, Michael Oliver, had a dream. A libertarian, he wanted to escape the overbearing clutches of governments. The only way to do so, he decided, was to create his own country, where there would be few or no rules. In 1968, he published A New Constitution for a New Country, a practical guide on how to construct a new nation in which “people will be free to do as they damn well please. Nothing will be illegal so long it does not infringe on the rights of others. If a citizen wishes to open a tavern, set up gambling or make pornographic films, the government will not interfere.” Income would be generated from fees from grateful banks wishing to establish offshore services—no questions asked—and offer transnational corporations a place to establish their headquarters without bothersome rules or taxation. It would even issue its own currency.Pulling together around 2,000 investors, Oliver established the Ocean Life Research Foundation. With funds raised, Oliver’s first idea was to find a country that would be willing to sell his foundation one of its islands, over which the Foundation would declare sovereignty. When he couldn’t find any takers, Oliver looked around for an unclaimed island that could become his libertarian paradise.The best Oliver could do was Minerva Reef, in the middle of the Pacific, 500 km (260 miles) southeast of Tonga. It had never been claimed, despite being discovered as far back as 1854. There were, however, serious problems establishing a settlement on the reef, not the least being that the reef lies some three feet above water at low tide and about four feet under water at high tide.Undaunted, in January 1971, Oliver and a small party went to Fiji, where they chartered a 54-foot motor sailer and purchased the materials to create artificial islands on the reef. On their arrival at Minerva, the party unloaded large hunks of coral wrapped in chicken wire, concrete blocks, sand and other rubble, which allowed them to build two micro-islands on the reef. On one of these islands, they built a small stone tower and hoisted its flag: a yellow torch of freedom on a solid blue background. The founding fathers of Minerva hoped to expand the reclaimed land until it would eventually support a city of 30,000 citizens.In February 1972, Oliver appointed Bud Davis the Provisional President of Minerva. A former project engineer with North American Rockwell, he ran the new republic from the living room of his one-story house in Gustine, California. From there, he mailed out a Declaration of Sovereignty to around one hundred nations, requesting recognition for the world’s newest principality. The only head of state willing to strike up diplomatic relations was the Sultan of Occussi-Ambeno. This coup lost its sheen when it was discovered that the Sultanate was a figment of the fertile imagination of Bruce Grenville, a New Zealand anarchist.While the founding fathers of Minerva were romantics, they were pleased to find that they had counterparts in the business community who were thinking along similar lines. For example, Carl Gerstacker, the chairman of Dow Chemical Company, startled his audience in 1972 when he mused:<blockquote style="background: rgb(245, 245, 245); margin: 1em 40px 1em -5px; border-left: 4px solid rgb(11, 13, 101); width: 602.542px; line-height: 32px; padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px;">“I have long dreamed of buying an island owned by no nation and of establishing the World Headquarters of the Dow Company on the truly neutral ground of such an island, beholden to no nation or society. If we were located on such truly neutral ground we could then really operate in the United States as US citizens, in Japan as Japanese citizens and in Brazil as Brazilians rather than being governed in prime by the laws of the United States … We could even pay any natives handsomely to move elsewhere.”
</blockquote>Dow later brushed this quote off as a joke, but when questioned at the time, Gerstacker said he was “deadly serious.”After reading a report about this speech, Oliver approached Dow to ask whether it would like to establish its world headquarters on Minerva. Gerstacker did not respond, and the principality remained no more than a flag fluttering in the wind over a few square yards of debris that threatened to wash away in the next storm.Unfortunately for Oliver, Australia did not take kindly to a privately owned principality being created in its neighborhood and pressured Tonga, being the closest country to Minerva, to act.Taking up the challenge was King Tupou IV, the heaviest monarch in the world, weighing in at over 440 pounds. On June 21, 1972, he led an expeditionary force to invade the Principality of Minerva. Without an army or navy to call on, the king recruited a five-man convict work detail to undertake the invasion and, to add gravitas to the expedition, a four-piece brass band played the Tongan national anthem from on-board the royal yacht Olovaba to inspire the troops. Taking courage, when he saw that Minerva was unoccupied, the king decided to personally lead his force. Once the tide was out, the king went ashore. After tearing down Minervan flag, he read aloud a proclamation of sovereignty. The reef now belonged to Kingdom of Tonga.When the king was safely back on board the royal yacht, his ragtag troops were left to dismantle the stone tower, which had been erected by Oliver. What up until now had been a bloodless war turned nasty, as a fight broke out between two of the convicts, and one was killed. So, while the Principality of Minerva never had a live population, it was left with a single gravesite, which was all that remained of the shortest and smallest war in the history of the world, and even that grave soon disappeared, as did the Principality of Minerva when successive storms washed away its artificial islands.</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div> <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-pesticides-assessments-2509672274.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-pesticides-assessments-2509672274.html</a> no linkTrump Administration Seeks Two-Year Delay on Pesticide Assessments Following Industry RequestThe Trump administration filed a motion before a federal judge requesting two more years to complete an assessment on the risks of three common pesticides on endangered species.The pesticides in question—chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon—are three organophosphate insecticides known to harm the vast majority of the nearly 1,800 animals and plants protected under the Endangered Species Act, according to an extensive federal study.Notably, the Associated Press reported, the administration's motion comes after chlorpyrifos-maker Dow Chemical Co. and two other organophosphate manufacturers asked the government to ignore the findings of the aforementioned study."It's appallingly clear that the pesticide industry is now essentially running Trump's EPA," said Lori Ann Burd, environmental health director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "This disturbing request shows that [EPA administrator Scott] Pruitt and Trump are more interested in protecting the profits of their corporate buddies than the hundreds of endangered species threatened by these deadly pesticides."If the request is granted, it would modify a 2014 legal agreement secured by the Center for Biological Diversity that required the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to assess the pesticides' harms by the end of 2017.According to a press release from the Center for Biological Diversity: ?"Under the Endangered Species Act, the EPA must consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service to ensure its actions do not jeopardize endangered species or harm their habitats.Despite this clear mandate, the EPA has essentially ignored the plight of endangered species injured and killed by pesticides. Only after the Center's 2014 legal victory did the agency agree to comply with this long-standing requirement.Unless the court approves the new delay request, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries services will use those assessments to develop common-sense measures to reduce the pesticides' harm to endangered species—for example by limiting spraying in their habitat—by the end of the year."The Associated Press pointed out that this move "is the latest example of the Trump administration seeking to block or delay environmental rules at the behest of the industry."Dow contributed $1 million to Trump's inaugural committee. President Trump also named Dow CEO Andrew Liveris head of his American Manufacturing Council and received the president's ceremonial pen used to sign the executive order aimed at eliminating regulations that he claims are damaging to the U.S. economy.In March, according to records obtained by the Associated Press, Pruitt met with Liveris for about 30 minutes at a Houston hotel. Later that month, Pruitt announced that he would no longer pursue a ban on chlorpyrifos from being used on food, ignoring his agency's own review that even small amounts of the pesticide could impact fetus and infant brain development.<div>=</div><div></div><div><a href="http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/these-corporations-have-biggest-influence-climate-policy">http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/these-corporations-have-biggest-influence-climate-policy</a></div><div>
</div><div> report's key findings:<ul><li>35 of the 50 most influential are actively lobbying against climate policy. They include companies in the fossil fuel value chain (ExxonMobil, Valero Energy, Chevron), energy intensive companies (BASF, ArcelorMittal, Bayer, Dow Chemical and Solvay) and electric utilities with large amounts of coal generating capacity (Southern Company, Duke Energy and American Electric Power).</li></ul></div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div></div>trms his inaugural address, Donald Trump declared that, effective immediately, he was transferring power to "you, the people." The new president added, "For too long, a small group in our nation's capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost.... That all changes starting right here and right now because this moment is your moment, it belongs to you."Trump didn't go into any detail about whom he was referring to, but there's ample evidence to suggest "the people" who were acquiring power were powerful corporate interests. Consider <a href="https://apnews.com/2350d7be5e24469ab445089bf663cdcb/EPA-chief-met-with-Dow-CEO-before-deciding-on-pesticide-ban" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; text-decoration-line: none;">this Associated Press report</a>, for example.<blockquote style="box-sizing: border-box; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility;">The Trump administration's top environmental official met privately with the chief executive of Dow Chemical shortly before reversing his agency's push to ban a widely used pesticide after health studies showed it can harm children's brains, according to records obtained by The Associated Press.Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt's schedule shows he met with Dow CEO Andrew Liveris on March 9 for about a half hour at a Houston hotel.</blockquote>About three weeks later, Pruitt ignored the findings of his own agency's chemical safety experts <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-republican-war-science-intensifies-the-trump-era" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; text-decoration-line: none;">to allow the use</a> of Dow's chlorpyrifos pesticide on food. The AP's report added that EPA scientists concluded "ingesting even minuscule amounts of the chemical can interfere with the brain development of fetuses and infants."A spokesperson for Pruitt's agency said that when he spoke to Dow Chemical's CEO, the two did not discuss the pending decision on the pesticide. The timing, apparently, is supposed to be seen as a coincidence.A separate <a href="https://www.apnews.com/a29073ecef9b4841b2e6cca07202bb67/AP-Exclusive:-Pesticide-maker-tries-to-kill-risk-study" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; text-decoration-line: none;">AP report</a> noted in April, "Dow Chemical chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris is a close adviser to President Donald Trump. The company wrote a $1 million check to help underwrite Trump's inaugural festivities.... When Trump signed an executive order in February mandating the creation of task forces at federal agencies to roll back government regulations, Dow's chief executive was at Trump's side."<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/how-the-debate-over-pesticides-unfolds-donald-trumps-swamp#break" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; text-decoration-line: none;">read more</a>http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show
<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/how-the-debate-over-pesticides-unfolds-donald-trumps-swamp#break">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/how-the-debate-over-pesticides-unfolds-donald-trumps-swamp#break</a>==<div class="field field-name-field-date field-type-datetime field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">June 4, 2017</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-author field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Lee Fang</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-field-source field-type-link-field field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/06/04/paris-accord-trump-lobby-ceo-withdraw/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">The Intercept</a></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"> The

chief executives of Dow Chemical and Corning Inc., among other business

leaders, were portrayed in the media as environmental <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2017/06/01/ceos-make-final-pleas-to-trump-to-stay-in-paris-climate-agreement/?utm_term=.740027c1d01c" target="blank">champions</a> for opposing President Donald Trump’s move on Thursday to <a href="https://theintercept.com/2017/06/01/will-trumps-slow-mo-walkaway-world-in-flames-behind-him-finally-provoke-consequences-for-planetary-arson/" target="blank">withdraw</a> from the Paris climate agreement.

Andrew N. Liveris, the chief executive of Dow, said in an initial statement that he was “<a href="http://www.mlive.com/news/saginaw/index.ssf/2017/06/dow_disappointed_in_trumps_dec.html" target="blank">disappointed</a>” with Trump’s decision. “Leaders don’t leave tables,” he later <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/02/dow-chemical-ceo-on-trump-climate-choice-leaders-dont-leave-tables.html" target="blank">said</a>, “Leaders stay.” In May, Liveris and Corning chief Wendell Weeks were among the <a href="http://bteam.org/announcements/30-major-ceos-call-on-trump-stay-in-paris/" target="_blank">signatories</a> to

an open letter in the Wall Street Journal in to “express our strong

support for the U.S. remaining in the Paris Climate Agreement.”

Yet both companies back one of the few business groups to openly

lobby the Trump administration in support of withdrawing from the plan.

The Industrial Energy Consumers of America, a trade group that

lobbies on behalf of industry, petitioned the administration to consider

ditching the Paris accord. The membership packet for the group <a href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Wk40wsy5-MQJ:www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/IECA-Marketing-Packet_2015.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" target="_blank">lists</a> Dow and Corning as members

“IECA fails to see the benefit of the Paris Climate Accord,” the group wrote in an April 24 <a href="https://www.eenews.net/assets/2017/04/26/document_daily_03.pdf" target="blank">letter</a> to G. David Banks, an environmental official in White House. The following month, IECA wrote another <a href="http://www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/05.15.17_Letter-to-Trump-Paris-Accord-1.pdf" target="blank">letter</a>,

this time directly to Trump, again blasting the accord for raising “the

prospects for loss of competitiveness and jobs” in energy-intensive

industries.

Dow, Corning, and the IECA did not provide a comment when contacted

on Friday. IECA members also include Koch Industries, Weyerhauser

Company, MillerCoors, Olin Corporation, and Alcoa, among others.

After Trumps withdrawal from the accord on Thursday, IECA <a href="http://www.ieca-us.com/wp-content/uploads/06.02.17_Paris-Climate-Accord-Press-Release-1.pdf" target="_blank">released</a> a

statement applauding the move. “The U.S. should never be a party to a

global or bilateral agreement that does not provide a level playing

field for manufacturing,” the statement read.

</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-topic field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix clearfix">

      </font><h2 class="field-label"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Topic(s):&nbsp;</font></h2>

        <a href="https://movetoamend.org/topics/corporate-rule">Corporate Rule</a>      </li><li class="field-item odd">
        <a href="https://movetoamend.org/topics/environment">Environment</a>      </li><li class="field-item even">
        <a href="https://movetoamend.org/topics/media">Media</a>      </li><li class="field-item odd">
        <a href="https://movetoamend.org/topics/money-free-speech">Money as Free Speech</a>      </li></ul>

</section>
http://www.alternet.org/environment/after-giving-1-million-trump-inauguration-dow-chemical-urges-administration-ignoreAfter contributing $1 million to Donald Trump’s presidential festivities, pesticide maker Dow Chemical Co. is asking the Administration to set aside previous findings of federal scientists across multiple agencies that confirm the risks that organophosphate pesticides pose to about 1,800 critically threatened or endangered species. This comes after the Administration <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2017/03/epa-reverses-course-allows-continued-use-highly-neurotoxic-pesticide-chlorpyrifos/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">abandoned plans to restrict</a> the brain-damaging pesticide chlorpyrifos, also an organophosphate pesticide created by Dow, despite mountains of evidence that show the chemical’s neurotoxic impacts on children’s brains.In <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/pesticides_reduction/pdfs/Letters_to_Pruitt_Zinke_Ross_from_Dow_Chemical.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none;">letters</a> sent to government officials, lawyers for Dow urge Administration officials and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set aside “biological evaluations” that detail how three highly toxic organophosphate insecticides –chlorpyrifos, malathion and diazinon– harm nearly all 1,800 threatened and endangered animals and plants, claiming the process to be “fundamentally flawed.”Federal agencies tasked with protecting endangered species –EPA, National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of Agriculture– have worked for years to identify the risks posed by pesticides to threatened and endangered species under to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Under Section 7 of ESA, states that any agency action must find that it “is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of habitat.” In January 2017, federal scientists determined that chlorpyrifos and malathion are <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2017/01/epa-finds-widely-used-pesticides-harm-97-percent-endangered-species/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">likely to harm 97 percent of endangered species</a> nationwide, while diazinon was found to harm 79 percent of protected species. More than 10,000 pages indicate the three pesticides under review pose a risk to nearly every endangered species studied. According to EPA’s release on the subject back in January, this is the “first-ever draft biological evaluations analyzing the nation-wide effects” of these registered chemicals on endangered species after decades of widespread use. The agencies were close to finalizing their assessments, which were expected to result in new restrictions on how and where the highly toxic pesticides can be used. The assessments are required as part of a<a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2014/03/groups-to-sue-over-failure-to-protect-endangered-species-from-dangerous-new-pesticide/" style="text-decoration-line: none;"> legal settlement in 2014</a> with the Center for Biological Diversity and other conservation organizations. In accordance with the legal settlement, these biological opinions must be finalized by December 2017.Last month, in an about-face, EPA’s new Administrator Scott Pruitt decided to side with industry and reject the conclusions of EPA scientists and the independent scientific literature. This decision <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2017/03/epa-reverses-course-allows-continued-use-highly-neurotoxic-pesticide-chlorpyrifos/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">reversed a tentative decision from 2015 to revoke chlorpyrifos</a> food tolerances that would have essentially banned the chemical in agriculture. Chlorpyrifos, an extremely potent neurotoxicant, was found by agency scientists to lead to mental development delays, attention problems, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder problems, and pervasive developmental disorders in children exposed to high levels of the chemical. However, Mr. Pruitt’s press release stated the “…need to provide regulatory certainty to the thousands of American farms that rely on chlorpyrifos, while still protecting human health and the environment.”<a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/resources/pesticide-gateway?pesticideid=17" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Chlorpyrifos</a>, <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/resources/pesticide-gateway?pesticideid=44" style="text-decoration-line: none;">malathion</a>, and <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/resources/pesticide-gateway?pesticideid=24" style="text-decoration-line: none;">diazinon</a> organophosphates derived from World War II nerve poisons are a common class of pesticides. This class of pesticides affect neurodevelopment, weaken the immune system, and impair respiratory function, among other severe health risks. Organophosphates are a widely used in agricultural, with millions of pounds applied yearly across the country, and are acutely toxic to bees, birds, mammals, aquatic organisms and certain species of algae at low doses.  Once present in the environment, organisms that come into contact with the pesticides will have difficulty performing basic survival and reproductive functions.Because of the neurological effects on children, on June 8, 2000, <a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/documents/pesticides/factsheets/LowDown%20on%20Dursban.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none;">EPA announced an agreement</a> it had reached with Dow AgroSciences that phased out most home uses of the commonly used insecticide. With the exception of uses on tomatoes, agricultural uses were allowed to continue under the decisionAfter years of refusing to comply with mandates to protect endangered species from the impacts of pesticides, EPA began consultations with other federal agencies following a two-year <a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=10394" style="text-decoration-line: none;">review by the National Academy of Sciences.</a> A stakeholder-engagement process that allowed in-depth involvement by the public and industry and provided opportunities for comment on the draft assessments. Industry provided extensive comments, many of which were ultimately rejected by the federal government because they were simply incompatible with the legal requirements of the Endangered Species Act. While all three chemical’ impacts are ubiquitous, and are currently allowed for use in agriculture, chlorpyrifos and malathion’s impact is broader due to their use as mosquito adulticides. EPA’s analysis required consideration of both direct impacts through dietary exposure as well as indirect impacts through prey. Adverse effects w ere far reaching, ranging from aquatic mammals like sea lions, to cave-dwelling spiders, and numerous listed birds.Ultimately, the widespread adoption of organic management is necessary to protect consumers and the environment in the long-term. Beyond Pesticides has long sought a broad-scale marketplace <a href="http://www.beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2014/12/new-study-says-organic-agricultural-can-and-must-feed-the-world/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">transition to organic practices</a> that, as a default, prohibits the use of toxic synthetic pesticides by law (unless subject to rigorous health and environmental standards and recommended by the National Organic Standards Board) and requires a systems-based approach that is protective of health and the environment. This approach never allows the use of highly toxic synthetic pesticides, such as the toxic organophosphates, and advances a viable, scalable path forward for growing food. Find out more about why organic is the right path forward for the future of farming by going to Beyond Pesticides’ <a href="http://beyondpesticides.org/programs/organic-agriculture/overview" style="text-decoration-line: none;">organic agriculture webpage</a>. http://www.ecowatch.com/shell-dow-chemical-drinking-water-2355598384.html
<div class="headline-container" style="margin: 0px; padding: 10px 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="headline" style="position: relative; line-height: 22px;">Shell, Dow Hid Cancer-Causing Chemical in Pesticides, Contaminating Drinking Water for Millions</div></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-bottom: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="js-scroll-trigger" data-target="body" data-triggers="render-rebelbar" data-toggle-class="with-floating-shares" data-loaded="true" style="margin-bottom: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="article-body js-expandable sm-mb-2 md-mb-4 js-update-url selectionShareable" data-url="http://www.ecowatch.com/shell-dow-chemical-drinking-water-2355598384.html" data-headline="Shell, Dow Hid Cancer-Causing Chemical in Pesticides, Contaminating Drinking Water for Millions" data-elid="2355598384" style="margin-bottom: 10px; padding: 0px 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="article-description" style="margin-bottom: 20px;">For decades, Shell and Dow hid a highly potent cancer-causing chemical in two widely used <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">pesticides</a>, contaminating <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/drinking-water" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">drinking water</a> for millions of people in California and beyond, according to lawsuits detailed in <a href="http://www.ewg.org/research/cancer-causing-pesticide-garbage-taints-tap-water-millions-california" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">a new report</a> from the <a href="http://www.ewg.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Environmental Working Group</a> (EWG).The chemical 1,2,3-trichloropropane or TCP, was formerly an unwanted and ineffective byproduct in Dow's Telone and Shell's D-D pesticides. Internal documents uncovered in lawsuits filed by communities in California's San Joaquin Valley show that the companies saved <a href="https://cdn.ewg.org/sites/default/files/u352/Shell%20Memo%20%28w.%20highlight%29.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">millions of dollars a year</a> by not properly disposing of TCP, a chemical a Dow scientist once called "<a href="https://static.ewg.org/reports/2017/tcp/Dow_Letter.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">garbage</a>," as hazardous waste.</div></div>no link
http://www.ecowatch.com/epa-pruitt-chlorpyrifos-2352337722.html
A Pen Isn't the Only Gift Trump Gave Dow ChemicalPerhaps the Senate, in its hearing on Scott Pruitt's nomination to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), should have questioned Pruitt as the chief pediatrician for America's children. As head of the EPA Pruitt gets to decide what is safe for our kids—in the air they breathe, the water they drink, the food they eat and the communities they play. Senators didn't ask—but they are finding out.
In his first big test of what kind of pediatrician he will be, Pruitt decided to reverse an earlier EPA decision to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos, a potent nerve gas banned from household use years ago, but still used in farms, orchards, pastures and golf courses.
Chlorpyrifos belongs to the same family as the nerve gas sarin—suspected of being behind the appalling chemical weapon attack which occurred this week in Syria, provoking appropriate outrage from the administration. But EPA has just decided to allow the continued dousing of America's rural landscapes with a close cousin—a different chemical weapon.Ch...causes of farm-worker pesticide poisoning—but is particularly toxic to young children and the fetus. The pesticide has come across my email screens periodically for over a decade, as organizations like the Nature Resources Defense Council slogged forward, petitioning the EPA to implement a simple requirement of federal pesticide law: that any pesticide must be shown to be safe before use. In 2015 the agency said is intended to ban it—but didn't finalize the decision. Eventually, courts ordered EPA to make a final decision on the ban—and Pruitt decided to ignore the science.He did not do so because he asserted that chlorpyrifos was safe; he simply said that there were uncertainties, and that in that situation farmers were entitled to continue to use the chemical, exposing farm workers, their children, surrounding communities and consumers of food sprayed with the chemical, to a pesticide whose safety is at best highly dubious—in quantities up to 14,000 times the safe level.
"We need to provide regulatory certainty to the thousands of American farms that rely on chlorpyrifos, while still protecting human health and the environment," Pruitt said—not the message you would expect to hear from a pediatrician if you asked him if you should give your kids foods laced with a potent neurotoxin that has been shown to damage their mental development.
This reversal of the clear requirement of federal pesticide law—that safety come first—along with Pruitt's revealing ordering of his priorities—regulatory certainty to pesticide users first, with human health qualified by "still"—reinforces something we are learning about the Trump administration.
Candidate Trump made a wide array of promises, many of them expressed within the 140 characters of a tweet. Huge numbers contradicted each other. How the administration would resolve those conflicts was one of the great unknowns. Trump, for example, proclaimed that "I want clean air and clean water" during his campaign. But he also pledged to dismantle the EPA.
It has been a fairly consistent pattern in the first 10 weeks of the administration that a campaign promise to help the powerful was likely to be honored, while one to help the vulnerable would be an earlier casualty of priority setting. Children of farm workers don't rank as high as Dow Chemical, the main manufacturer and defender of chlorpyrifos. QED—we know how this administration will come down....carper ~ pruitt sue?
  enlist duo pruitt sueddow<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/epa-lawsuit-dow-enlist-duo-2323372668.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/epa-lawsuit-dow-enlist-duo-2323372668.html</a>=<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-executive-order-regulations-2282814216.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-executive-order-regulations-2282814216.html</a>Donald Trump has signed another executive order aimed at eliminating regulations that he claims are damaging to the U.S. economy, but some worry that the measure will roll back critical environmental protections.The order, called "Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda," directs each government agency to create a task force to evaluate existing federal regulations and recommend whether they should be kept, repealed or modified.A White House official told POLITICO that the task forces will "focus on eliminating costly and unnecessary regulations."The new order also directs agency heads to appoint "regulatory reform officers" to ensure that agencies are carrying out the president's other executive orders, such as his recent 2-for-1 rule that requires federal agencies to repeal two old regulations for every new one."Excessive regulation is killing jobs," Trump said during the signing ceremony. "Every regulation should have to pass a simple test: Does it make life better or safer for American workers or consumers? If the answer is no, we will be getting rid of it.""We will stop punishing companies for doing business in the United States," Trump added. "It's going to be absolutely just the opposite. They will be incentivized to doing business."

The president was flanked by leaders of major U.S. corporations, including Lockheed Martin, Johnson & Johnson, Dow Chemical Co. and Campbell Soup.
Dow Chemical Co. chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris, who leads Trump's advisory council on manufacturing and received the presidential signing pen. Just yesterday, Liveris praised the Trump administration for being "the most pro-business administration since the Founding Fathers."Bloomberg Politics pointed out that The White House already has an entire agency, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, that reviews all government regulations before they are issued. It is unclear how the existing office will be working with the new officials.
Environmental groups have criticized Tr<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/whistleblower-lawsuit-chemical-companies-2005784783.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/whistleblower-lawsuit-chemical-companies-2005784783.html</a>...BASF Corporation, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/bayer-buys-monsanto-2004657068.html" style="text-decoration: none;">Bayer</a> Material Science LLC, Dow Chemical Company and Huntsman International LLC have been named in a False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuit brought by New York law firm Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP on behalf of the U.S. government.
EcoWatch learned that the recently unsealed whistleblower lawsuit was served on the chemical companies on Wednesday. The lawsuit was <a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/831315/kasowitz-benson-says-chem-cos-hid-risks-owe-billions" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">originally filed</a> under seal in federal court in Northern California.Kasowitz brought this action on behalf of itself and the federal government to recover more than $90 billion in damages and penalties under the FCA, which imposes penalties for concealing obligations to the government.According to a copy of the lawsuit seen by EcoWatch, "Each of these companies is separately liable to the United States Government for billions of dollars in civil reporting penalties, which continue to accumulate by tens of thousands of dollars daily, and for billions of dollars in similarly increasing breach of contract damages." ...In response to a lawsuit filed by environmental groups, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday <a href="http://bit.ly/1Xfpv0g" style="text-decoration: none;">revoked the registration</a> of the toxic herbicide “Enlist Duo,” which contains the cancer causing 2,4-D and is central to future uses of genetically engineered (GE) crops in chemical-intensive agriculture.The marketing of this chemical in genetically engineered agriculture has become integral to the chemical industry’s response to weed resistance to the widely used herbicide glyphosate (Roundup), also identified as cancer causing this year by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/14/epa-pesticide-overturnedA federal court has overturned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/02/07/epa-approves-another-pesticide-toxic-bees/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">approval of sulfoxaflor</a>, a pesticide linked to the <a href="http://www.takepart.com/feature/2014/06/20/what-is-killing-bees" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">mass die-off of honeybees</a> that pollinate a third of the world’s food supply.The three-judge panel said the EPA <a href="http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/2013/sulfoxaflor-decision.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">green-lit sulfoxaflor</a> even though initial studies showed the product was <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/04/obama-save-bees-toxic-insecticides/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">highly toxic to pollinators</a> such as <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/07/28/if-all-bees-died-what-would-happen/" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">bees</a>. The chemical compound belongs to a class of insecticides, known as <a href="http://www.takepart.com/article/2014/06/24/are-neonicotinoids-new-ddt-bees-and-other-wildlife" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">neonicotinoids</a>, that scientific studies have implicated in bee deaths.“Because the EPA’s decision to unconditionally register sulfoxaflor was based on flawed and limited data, we conclude that the unconditional approval was not supported by substantial evidence,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel wrote in its opinion.In her opinion, Judge Mary M. Schroeder <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/sulfoxaflor-opinion.pdf" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">wrote</a> that the EPA had initially decided to conditionally approve the chemical but ordered more studies done to better understand the effects the systemic insecticide would have on bees.“A few months later, however, the EPA <a href="http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/2013/sulfoxaflor-decision.html" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">unconditionally registered</a> the insecticides with certain mitigation measures and a lowering of the maximum application rate,” Schroeder wrote. “It did so without obtaining any further studies.”The product, sold in the U.S. as Transform or Closer, must be <a href="http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/06/02/big-box-stores-crunchy-organic-shops-bee-killing-pesticides-are-getting-boot" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">pulled from store shelves</a> by Oct. 18.Gregory Loarie, lead counsel for environmental group Earthjustice, which represented beekeepers and beekeeping groups in the case, said the ruling could lead to reviews of other EPA-approved pesticides.“The EPA rarely, if ever, has reliable information regarding the impact that insecticides have on<a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=honeybees" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">honeybee</a> colonies writ large, as opposed to individual, adult worker bees,” Loarie said in an email. “With the findings in this case, EPA should move quickly to re-examine other registrations for possible flawed and limited data.”Sulfoxaflor, created by Indianapolis-based <a href="http://newsroom.dowagro.com/press-release/dow-agrosciences-receives-us-epa-registration-sulfoxaflor" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">Dow AgroSciences</a>, is a systemic insecticide. When it’s sprayed on soybean, cotton, citrus, fruit and vegetable crops, it kills bugs on contact and is also absorbed into the plant’s flowers, stems and roots. When insects ingest any part of the plant, they die too.Paul Towers, spokesperson for advocacy group Pesticide Action Network, said that because sulfoxaflor was only approved in 2013, it hasn’t been widely used. “The prospect of greater use loomed, especially as other neonicotinoids are under increased scrutiny and pressure for phase-out,” Towers said.That phase-out already has <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/apr/29/bee-harming-pesticides-banned-europe" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background: transparent;">started in Europe</a>; EU member nations banned three neonicotinoids in 2013 for two years after the chemicals were linked to the dramatic decline in bee populations there.“This is the classic pesticide industry shell game,” Towers said. “As more science underscores the harms of a pesticide, they shift to newer, less studied products. And it takes regulators years to catch up.”EPA Regional Chief Resigns After DisputeOver Dow's Dioxin Pollution 
STEPHEN POWER & ANA CAMPOY / Wall Street Journal 3may2008
 http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2008/Gade-EPA-Dow3may08.htm
The head of the Environmental Protection Agency's Midwest office in Chicago says she resigned in a dispute with the agency's leadership over enforcement actions involving Dow Chemical Co.
The departure of Mary Gade is the latest in a series of unusually public conflicts between the EPA's chief, Stephen Johnson, and his subordinates, and comes at a time when Mr. Johnson is under criticism from congressional Democrats for some of his decisions.
In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Ms. Gade, a former corporate attorney who advised the Bush presidential campaign in 2000 on environmental matters and who was appointed to her post less than two years ago, said senior agency officials on Thursday told her to quit or be fired.
Ms. Gade linked the agency's action to her office's efforts to press Dow Chemical to clean up a Michigan river system that is near a Dow chemical-manufacturing plant and that is contaminated with dioxin as a result of past waste-disposal practices, emissions and incineration at the plant.
"It's related to the ongoing discussion between me, my region and [EPA] headquarters about Dow," Ms. Gade said. She declined to specify what she and her superiors had disagreed about but added that ordinary citizens "should be concerned" because "this may be some of the worst dioxin contamination" in the U.S.
"It's important we make sure the company steps up to the plate and meets its obligations under the law," Ms. Gade said. "It would be great if I could stay and fight this battle, but it reached the point where I had to resign."
An EPA spokesman confirmed Ms. Gade had been placed on administrative leave and that she has submitted her resignation. He declined to respond to her other comments, or to specify why she had been placed on administrative leave. The EPA's regional administrator in Chicago oversees federal environmental programs in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin.
John Musser, a Dow Chemical spokesman, said the company never asked the EPA to relieve Ms. Gade from her duties. He added that the company found out about her placement on leave from the media. He said the company doesn't know what led the EPA to do that.
Ms. Gade's resignation was reported on the Chicago Tribune's Web site late Thursday.
In January, Ms. Gade's office announced that it had stopped negotiations with Dow Chemical aimed at reaching a settlement over cleanup actions related to dioxin contamination in the Tittabawassee River system. The agency said that "key issues that are paramount for protecting human health and the environment remain unresolved," and quoted Ms. Gade as saying she was "extremely disappointed with" the outcome of the talks. In the interview, she declined to specify what her office and Dow had disagreed about.
Dow's Mr. Musser said that Ms. Gade's office asked Dow "to do things that were not consistent with national guidelines or national policy." He declined to elaborate, saying discussions with the EPA were confidential.
After the negotiations fell through, Dow met with EPA officials in Washington to discuss what the company perceived as unfair treatment by the local office, said Mr. Musser. Ms. Gade was present at the meeting, Mr. Musser added.
Ms. Gade's resignation comes as Mr. Johnson is under fire from congressional Democrats for overruling his staff in disputes affecting major industries.
In December, against the recommendations of many senior EPA staffers, Mr. Johnson denied California permission to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from automobiles. Mr. Johnson also has resisted pressure from Democrats and many states to formally declare greenhouse-gas emissions a threat to public welfare — the legal prerequisite to regulating them — despite a tentative conclusion from agency staffers last year that they do.
Because a decision to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions from vehicles could trigger similar regulations affecting a range of other industries, Mr. Johnson has called for first soliciting public comment on the idea.
source: p.A4 3may2008
Bush Admin Forces Out EPA RegulatorWho Sought Regulation of Dow
Democracy Now! News 2may2008A top federal environmental regulator says the Bush administration has forced her to step down over her attempts to regulate pollution caused by the industrial giant Dow Chemical. Mary Gade was the Environmental Protection Agency’s top official in the Midwest until she resigned on Thursday. Last year, Gade used emergency powers to force Dow to clean up four areas contaminated with the cancer-causing Dioxin chemical near Dow’s Michigan headquarters. One of the areas had one of the largest amounts of Dioxin ever recorded in the United States. Gade says she resigned after she was stripped of her powers and told to quit or be fired by June 1st. Democratic Congressmember Rahm Emanuel of Illinois said, “I’m surprised if anybody is surprised by this. This administration, from day one, has always chosen polluters over the environment.”
source: 3may2008
Gade's Work Had Won PraiseMICHAEL HAWTHORNE / Chicago Tribune 1may2008Follow the ToxinsThe riverbanks and waterways downstream from the Dow Chemical plant leading to Lake Huron contain areas with striking levels of dioxins. Prolonged exposure to the toxic chemicals likely increases the risk of cancer and other ailments, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Residential cleanup standards (in ppt = parts per trillion) Michigan: 90ppt U.S.EPA: 1,000pptFive months ago, a top U.S. Environmental Protection Agency official gave Mary Gade a performance rating of "outstanding." On Thursday, the same official told her to quit or be fired as the agency's top regulator in the Midwest.
She chose to resign.Gade, a former corporate attorney and state regulator appointed by President Bush in September 2006, became the latest EPA official to become ensnared in a long-standing dispute with Dow Chemical, which long ago acknowledged it is responsible for dioxin contamination near its Michigan headquarters but has resisted federal and state involvement in cleanup plans.During the 1990s, Gade led the Illinois EPA under Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, who said he knew her as a team player who worked diligently to broker agreements between business interests and environmental groups."She is very committed to the environment, but she's not a fanatic," Edgar said. "She was never a Lone Ranger type."As head of the federal EPA office in Chicago, Gade won praise from environmental groups that often are at odds with the agency.Last summer, when BP planned to dump more pollution into Lake Michigan from its Whiting, Ind., refinery, Gade convened a special hearing that brought together regional leaders and BP representatives to discuss potential solutions. BP ultimately agreed to abide by its previous, more stringent water permit.Mary GadeGade also blocked a new water permit for the U.S. Steel mill in Gary until Indiana officials took steps to ensure it dumped less pollution into a Lake Michigan tributary."We didn't always agree, but she always worked hard to be very fair and objective," said Jack Darin, director of the Illinois Sierra Club. "I am concerned that this could have a chilling effect on the dedicated public servants who work hard every day to protect us from pollution."Dow spokesman John Musser said the company did not know Gade had been forced out. He said Dow still prefers to work with the EPA over Michigan officials, whom the federal agency has designated to oversee future dioxin cleanup.But Gade's actions against Dow outraged many local officials in the Saginaw area."In 20 years of public life I have never encountered a more unprofessional, vindictive and insulting government official," said U.S. Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), whose wife is a former Dow attorney.Critics said Gade's ouster was another example of the Bush administration working on behalf of polluters.Said U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.): "I'm surprised if anybody is surprised by this."A Chicago-area Republican, U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois, said: "Congress will want to make sure that no action was taken because an employee aggressively acted to protect the public."When EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson announced that the president had appointed Gade to the regional job in Chicago, he touted her "impressive environmental career" that began at the agency two decades earlier.For her part, Gade has described herself in the past as a loyal Bush supporter.In an essay published by the Atlantic magazine in 2000, Gade wrote that Bush had a "stronger bipartisan record on conservation and the environment than Al Gore ... precisely because Bush puts action and results above talk and posture."source: 3may2008then:http://www.stuevesiegel.com/ssh/news-and-press/dow-chemical-to-remove-toxic-soil-from-michigan-river/Dow Chemical to Remove Toxic Soil From Michigan River
By Jack Kaskey and Sophia PearsonJuly 13 (Bloomberg) -- Dow Chemical Co., the largest U.S. chemical maker, agreed to remove contaminated soil along three sections of the Tittabawassee River downstream from factories in Midland, Michigan, where the company is based.The company will remove 54,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment and floodplain soil as far as six miles (10 kilometers) downstream from the 1,900-acre site, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said today in a statement. The material, contaminated with furans and dioxins, will be buried in a company landfill in Midland, Dow spokesman John Musser said.Dow still faces a class-action lawsuit by 2,000 homeowners in Saginaw County who live along the river. The company is appealing a Michigan judge's ruling in October granting class action status to the group. The case was argued before the state appeals court in May, Norman Siegel, an attorney for the homeowners, said.We're happy to see that Dow has started to own up to the contamination,'' Siegel, from the firm Stueve Siegel Hanson LLP in Kansas City, Missouri, said in a phone interview. We certainly call on Dow to compensate affected homeowners.''The residents sued Dow in 2003 after the state Department of Environmental Quality found that dioxin levels downstream from the plant were up to 700 times higher than upstream. Attorneys for the residents are seeking unspecified damages from Dow for alleged losses in property value plus punitive damages and clean-up costs.Bleach ProductionThe contamination is the byproduct of chlorine-bleach production at the 110-year-old site that was discontinued before World War I, Musser said. The work should be completed this year, depending on river conditions, and is part of a larger accord to clean up the entire 22-mile river, Musser said. He declined to estimate the cost of the project.Remediation at the Midland site cost $20 million last year, Dow said in a Feb. 20 regulatory filing. The company had a $41 million accrual for remediation as of Dec. 31. Dow's global accrued liability for probable environmental remediation and restoration expenses at the end of the year was $347 million.Dioxins and furans are likely human carcinogens that accumulate in the body's fatty tissue, according to the EPA. They also can cause reproductive problems and weakened immune systems, the agency said on its Web site.Dow had agreed with Michigan regulators to begin cleaning up two sections of the river, based on "uncharacteristically elevated levels" of dioxins and furans, Musser said. The EPA this year added a third section, he said.The company is sampling sediment in the next 11 miles of the river this year and plans to complete sampling along the entire river by the end of 2008 as part of a 2003 hazardous-waste- operating license with the state, he said.Shares of Dow rose 20 cents to $46.33 in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. They have gained 16 percent this year, bringing the company's market value to $44.2 billionJuly 13, 2007<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=dow enlist duo epa nrdc suit  monarch, earth justicenot neo nic
The Enlist Duo herbicide contains <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/glyphosate" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none 0px; border: 0px none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 22px; background-image: none; background-attachment: scroll; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat;">glyphosate</a> as well as a new form of <a href="http://www2.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/24-d" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none 0px; border: 0px none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 22px; background-image: none; background-attachment: scroll; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: 0px 0px; background-repeat: repeat;">2,4-D</a>, which is already used on other crops like wheat and on pastureland and golf courses." bs <a href="http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/10/17/natural-resources-defense-council-sues-epa-to-block-rollout-of-dow-enlist-duo-gmo-system/" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2014/10/17/natural-resources-defense-council-sues-epa-to-block-rollout-of-dow-enlist-duo-gmo-system/ </a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div>agribiz superweed<a href="http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/15/epa-approves-gmo-pesticide">http://ecowatch.com/2014/10/15/epa-approves-gmo-pesticide</a>The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/72fde554930f3f6985257d7200591180?OpenDocument" target="blank" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; -webkit-transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2000007629395px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">announced</a> today approval, “with first-time ever restrictions,” of the new <a href="http://ecowatch.com/search/?q=herbicides" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; -webkit-transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2000007629395px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">herbicide</a> Enlist Duo, manufactured by Dow AgriSciences. The pesticide is approved for use in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin. Approval is pending in 10 other states with public comments continuing through Nov. 14....===

CoC:

Dow Chemical delivered $1.7 million to the <a href="http://www.uschamber.com/" title="The chamber’s site.">chamber</a> last year as the group took a leading role in aggressively fighting proposed rules that would impose tighter security requirements on chemical facilities.

=milloy bsuscap<a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-15-2009/0005094291&EDATE=">Media Release</a>WANTED: 'CARBON CRIMINALS'; JunkScience.com Launches Poster Campaign Spotlighting USCAP CEOs Who Betray America by Lobbying for Cap-and-TradeWASHINGTON, Sept. 15 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- JunkScience.com today launched a "WANTED" poster advertisement campaign alerting the public to be on the lookout for "carbon criminal" CEOs who are lobbying for the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation now being considered by Congress."These conscienceless CEOs are armed with lobbyists and are dangerous to America," says Steve Milloy, publisher of JunkScience.com and author of the Amazon.com Best-selling book "Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them.""American workers, taxpayers, consumers, families, and businesses are all gravely threatened by Waxman-Markey," says Milloy. "As explained in the WANTED posters, these CEOs have teamed up with America-hating green groups to lobby for legislation that would make energy dramatically more expensive and eviscerate the American dream and standard of living, while not accomplishing any positive for the environment," Milloy added.The CEOs featured in the campaign are executives with companies belonging to the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP,http://www.us-cap.org), a gang of large corporations and Park Avenue environmental groups that have joined forces to lobby for the Waxman-Markey cap-and-tax bill.JunkScience's first six carbon criminal "WANTED" posters feature:<ul style="line-height: 19.0400009155273px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li>Exelon CEO John Roe, the "carbon bandit," who stands to make billions of dollars at taxpayer expense from Waxman-Markey's free carbon allowances;</li><li>General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt, the "carbon schemer," who would rather profit from lobbying for Waxman-Markey than innovating products that consumers actually want;</li><li>Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers, the "carbon betrayer," who is lobbying for higher energy prices and against his own customers and shareholders;</li><li>Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris, the "carbon extortionist," who threatens to send American jobs overseas unless Congress pays him off with free carbon allowances;</li><li>Caterpillar CEO James Owens, who can only be considered as "carbon clueless" since he is lobbying against the coal industry, one of his biggest customers; and</li><li>John Deer & Co. Chairman Robert Lane, the "carbon crapshooter," who seems to be betting that he can wreck the economy and profit simultaneously.</li></ul>The campaign kicked off with the poster of Exelon's Rowe featured on the Drudge Report (Chicago only). "More 'WANTED' posters for USCAP CEOs will follow, but America needed to know about these guys now," says Milloy."The Senate is about to take up the Waxman-Markey bill in hopes of enacting it before December when President Obama goes to Copenhagen to submit the U.S. to a United Nations-run international cap-and-tax agreement," Milloy notes."But for these CEOs, America would not be looking down the barrel of the Waxman-Markey gun," Milloy observed. "If you see one of them," Milloy warns, "approach with caution and shake your head in disgust."The WANTED posters may be viewed at http://www.junksciencearchive.com/Wanted=

Also, NYT reporter Eric Lipton wrote an article on Louisiana charity the

Jindal Foundation, to which Dow contributed $100,000. The paragraph on Dow

noted neither it nor UCC have been fined for a December 2009 chemical

spill in St. Charles parish, despite the state proposing a fine for the

companies. The article as a whole questions whether companies are

influencing Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal through the charitable

foundation, which is run under his wife's name.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/us/politics/03jindal.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

===

dow corning<h2 style="font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(170, 170, 170); line-height: 1.3; background: none rgb(255, 255, 255);">Breast implant controversy[<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dow_Corning&action=edit&section=3" title="Edit section: Breast implant controversy" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">edit</a>]</h2>Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action" title="Class action" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">class-action</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawsuit" title="Lawsuit" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">lawsuits</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Corning#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[2]</a> claimed that Dow Corning's silicone <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_implant" title="Breast implant" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">breast implants</a> caused systemic health problems. The claims first centered around <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breast_cancer" title="Breast cancer" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">breast cancer</a>, and then migrated to a range of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoimmunity" title="Autoimmunity" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">autoimmune diseases</a>, including <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemic_lupus_erythematosus" title="Systemic lupus erythematosus" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">lupus</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheumatoid_arthritis" title="Rheumatoid arthritis" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">rheumatoid arthritis</a> and various neurological problems. This led to numerous lawsuits beginning in 1984 and culminating in a 1998 multibillion dollar <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action" title="Class action" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">class action</a> settlement. As a result, Dow Corning was in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankruptcy" title="Bankruptcy" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">bankruptcy</a>protection for nine years, ending in June 2004.A number of large, independent reviews of the scientific literature, including the U.S. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Medicine" title="Institute of Medicine" style="text-decoration: none; background: none;">Institute of Medicine</a>, have subsequently found that silicone breast implants do not appear to cause breast cancers or any identifiable systemic disease.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Corning#cite_note-nyt-3" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[3]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Corning#cite_note-frontline-4" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[4]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dow_Corning#cite_note--5" style="text-decoration: none; white-space: nowrap; background: none;">[5]</a>===

<a href="http://www.panna.org/resources/caia/corpProfilesDow">http://www.panna.org/resources/caia/corpProfilesDow</a>

PANNA Corporate Profile: Dow Chemical Company

April 2004

The largest chemical company in the U.S., Dow Chemical is a leading producer of pesticides, plastics, hydrocarbons and other chemicals.<a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn1" id="ednref1" name="ednref1" title="ednref1">[1]</a> Its production processes and practices have poisoned the environment as well as consumers and workers, sometimes with dire consequences for entire communities. The company is responsible for hazardous pesticides (such as 2,4-D, Dursban, Telone and DBCP), byproducts such as dioxin, ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and Agent Orange and napalm used during the Vietnam War. In 1999, Dow acquired Union Carbide, whose pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, released methyl isocyanate and other chemicals in 1984, causing one of the worst industrial disasters in history. Recently Dow has positioned itself as one five corporations dominating the genetically engineered seed market. Dow also exerts considerable political and social influence.

On this page:

<table width="300" border="0"><tbody><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/2990038b-b903-5216-a60d-beb584500176.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#atAglance">Dow at a Glance</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/c9ea1f66-a6a5-56a4-b9b5-bfa4f411e69a.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#pesticidesAndAgBiotech">Pesticides and Agricultural Biotechnology</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/ae4c1a79-f075-502e-a934-f21469aba2e9.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#focusDBCP">Focus: Dibromochloropropane (DBCP), Infertility and Lies</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/33ffd47a-68c1-5fa5-a7d8-a6545b081098.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#focusBhopal">Focus: The Bhopal Tragedy</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/d35eaab5-5b9c-543a-9623-cfb7cae88f0c.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#wideRange">A Wide Range of Impacts</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/70e6d887-e620-54aa-96b3-6f97e6e549f3.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#focusDioxin">Focus: Dioxin</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/16ef527b-47be-5f74-95f9-755f519a5fb6.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#undueInfluence">Undue Influence</a></td></tr><tr><td width="12" valign="top" height="21"><img src="/b1356cb6-ae76-58d4-8c9c-89a16982ff06.gif"/></td><td width="250" valign="middle" height="21"><a href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#resources">Resources for Action</a></td></tr></tbody></table>

<a name="atAglance" title="atAglance" id="atAglance"> </a>Dow at a Glance

<div>

Headquarters Midland, Michigan, USA

Key subsidiaries Cargill Dow LLC, Dow AgroSciences LLC, Dow Automotive, Dow Corning Corporation, Dow Reichhold Specialty Latex LLC, Union Carbide Corporation

Product sectors In 2000: Chemicals and Metals (12%), Performance Chemicals (14%), Plastics (25%), Performance Plastics (27%), Agricultural Products (10%), Hydrocarbons and Energy (11%), Other (1%)<a name="ednref2" title="ednref2" id="ednref2" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn2">[2]</a>

Employees About 50,000 employees worldwide<a name="ednref3" title="ednref3" id="ednref3" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn3">[3]</a>

Manufacturing facilities 191 sites in 38 countries

Revenues Nearly US$30,000,000,000 a year

Net income In 2002, Dow lost US$338 million. In 2000, Dow’s last profitable year, the company earned about US$1.5 billion<a name="ednref4" title="ednref4" id="ednref4" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn4">[4]</a>

Executive compensation In 2002, seven Dow executives received an average compensation of nearly US$800,000.<a name="ednref5" title="ednref5" id="ednref5" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn5">[5]</a> (This figure does not include long-term compensation, unrealized performance bonuses and stock options.) In 2003, Chairman and CEO William S. Stavropoulos received US$3.6 million in salary and bonus. His total compensation, including restricted stock awards and long-term incentive payouts, was US$11.4 million.<a name="ednref6" title="ednref6" id="ednref6" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn6">[6]</a>

Interlocking directorates<a name="ednref7" title="ednref7" id="ednref7" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn7">[7]</a> Five of 14 Dow Directors sit on Boards for other top 100 U.S. corporations<a name="ednref8" title="ednref8" id="ednref8" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn8">[8]</a>

Type of corporation Public (traded on the New York Stock Exchange)

<a name="pesticidesAndAgBiotech" title="pesticidesAndAgBiotech" id="pesticidesAndAgBiotech"> </a>Pesticides and Agricultural Biotechnology

Dow Chemical describes itself as “Providing pest management and biotechnology products that improve the quality and quantity of the earth's food supply and contribute to the safety, health and quality of life of the world's growing population.”<a name="ednref9" title="ednref9" id="ednref9" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn9">[9]</a> The chemical giant’s agricultural products, however, tell a different story.

Pesticides

Dow is responsible for a wide range of harmful pesticide products and ingredients, including:

2,4-D Dioxin-contaminated herbicide that was one of two active ingredients in Agent Orange and Agent White (herbicides widely used by the U.S. during the Vietnam war). Possible carcinogen, suspected endocrine disruptor and potential ground water contaminant.<a name="ednref10" title="ednref10" id="ednref10" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn10">[10]</a>

2,4,5-T Second active ingredient of Agent Orange. In 1977, a lawsuit and subsequent scientific studies linked 2,4,5-T crop spraying to miscarriages in Oregon.<a name="ednref11" title="ednref11" id="ednref11" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn11">[11]</a> Dow produced 2,4,5-T in New Zealand until 1987, years after it was banned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).<a name="ednref12" title="ednref12" id="ednref12" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn12">[12]</a> 2,4,5-T, a dioxin contaminated chemical, is a carcinogen, suspected endocrine disruptor and PAN Bad Actor pesticide.

Chlorpyrifos (Dursban and Lorsban) Insecticide affecting the nervous system and brain. Especially harmful to children, reported as the cause of 7,000 accidental poisonings in the U.S. each year.<a name="ednref13" title="ednref13" id="ednref13" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn13">[13]</a> In 2000, EPA banned household uses of chlorpyrifos (primarily affecting Dow’s Dursban line). Dow sold about US$500 million worth of the chemical a year in the 1990s.<a name="ednref14" title="ednref14" id="ednref14" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn14">[14]</a> Chlorpyrifos is a cholinesterase inhibitor, suspected endocrine disruptor and PAN Bad Actor pesticide.

Clopyralid Herbicide widely used on lawns and wheat crops that persists in the environment up to 18 months.<a name="ednref15" title="ednref15" id="ednref15" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn15">[15]</a> Has been found at harmful levels in commercial and municipal compost in Washington, California, Pennsylvania and New Zealand.<a name="ednref16" title="ednref16" id="ednref16" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn16">[16]</a> In response to growing pressure from composters and organic farmers, Dow withdrew clopyralid for use on residential lawns in the U.S. in 2002, although this use may persist.<a name="ednref17" title="ednref17" id="ednref17" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn17">[17]</a> Clopyralid is a potential ground water contaminant and PAN Bad Actor pesticide.

DDT Implicated as a cause of egg-shell thinning and human cancer by Rachel Carson in Silent Spring and subsequent investigations. EPA banned DDT in 1973 but it remains in use as an insecticide in some countries. DDT affects the human nervous system and can cause liver damage.<a name="ednref18" title="ednref18" id="ednref18" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn18">[18]</a> DDT is also a developmental/reproductive toxin, suspected endocrine disruptor and PAN Bad Actor pesticide.

Ethylene Dibromide (EDB) Nematicide, rodenticide and insecticide banned in the U.S. in 1983. EDB is a carcinogen, ground water contaminant, developmental/reproductive toxin, suspected endocrine disruptor and PAN Bad Actor pesticide. It is also linked to organ damage.<a name="ednref19" title="ednref19" id="ednref19" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn19">[19]</a>

Haloxyfop Herbicide that EPA would not register because it is a probable human carcinogen, yet sold throughout the world as Gallant and Verdict.<a name="ednref20" title="ednref20" id="ednref20" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn20">[20]</a> One of many “circle of poison” pesticides that can be manufactured in the U.S., applied abroad and returned as residue on imported foods.<a name="ednref21" title="ednref21" id="ednref21" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn21">[21]</a>

Nuarimol Fungicide causing cancer and birth defects in animals.<a name="ednref22" title="ednref22" id="ednref22" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn22">[22]</a> Not registered in the U.S. but sold in Africa, Colombia, Honduras and Europe.<a name="ednref23" title="ednref23" id="ednref23" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn23">[23]</a>

Oxyfluorfen Herbicide classified by EPA a possible human carcinogen.<a name="ednref24" title="ednref24" id="ednref24" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn24">[24]</a>

Pentachlorophenol (PCP) Highly toxic algicide, fungicide, herbicide, insecticide, molluscicide and wood preservative.<a name="ednref25" title="ednref25" id="ednref25" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn25">[25]</a> Exposure to PCP causes cells to produce excessive heat, resulting in fever and organ damage. PCP is a carcinogen, suspected endocrine disruptor and PAN Bad Actor pesticide. Dow no longer produces PCP.

Picloram Herbicide chemically similar to clopyralid, posing threat to composters.<a name="ednref26" title="ednref26" id="ednref26" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn26">[26]</a> Contains the contaminant hexachlorobenzene (HCB), a probable human carcinogen.<a name="ednref27" title="ednref27" id="ednref27" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn27">[27]</a> Was one of two active ingredients in Agent White. Picloram is a potential ground water contaminant.

Telone Soil fumigant under consideration as a replacement for methyl bromide, a highly toxic and ozone-depleting fumigant currently being phased out in the United States. Telone is a carcinogen, ground water contaminant and PAN Bad Actor pesticide. One of its active ingredients, 1,3-dichloropropene, produces cancer and birth defects in test animals.<a name="ednref28" title="ednref28" id="ednref28" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn28">[28]</a>

Sulfuryl fluoride (Vikane) Fumigant used to kill termites and other pests. Restricted for extreme acute toxicity.<a name="ednref29" title="ednref29" id="ednref29" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn29">[29]</a> In 2002, EPA granted Dow a three-year experimental permit to use sulfuryl fluoride as a post-harvest crop fumigant on walnuts and raisins to evaluate its efficacy and safety as a replacement for methyl bromide.<a name="ednref30" title="ednref30" id="ednref30" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn30">[30]</a> Sulfuryl fluoride is a PAN Bad Actor pesticide.

Agricultural Biotechnology

In 1998, Dow announced that it would begin “pursuing long-term, value-added growth opportunities through biotechnology.”<a name="ednref44" title="ednref44" id="ednref44" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn44">[44]</a> Today, Dow, led by its subsidiary Dow AgroSciences, is a major player in agricultural biotechnology. Its product lines include Mycogen Seeds, Bt corn and Atlas Roundup Ready soybeans. Dow is also pursuing industrial and pharmaceutical biotechnology applications.

Genetically engineered crops pose serious risks to public health and the environment, increase reliance on pesticides, deepen agribusiness control over farmers and undermine food security and sovereignty. Most biotech seeds are licensed to farmers, not sold—making it illegal to replant, save, trade, share or breed them as farmers have done for millennia. Global food security requires access to land, small-scale, ecologically based farming systems and the crop diversity needed to respond to varied and changing environments and growing conditions. Genetically engineered crops, in contrast, are an extension of industrial agricultural practices that concentrate land ownership, rely on synthetic pesticides, fertilizers and other off-farm inputs, and dramatically reduce crop biodiversity.

For an overview of agricultural biotechnology and its impacts, see PANNA’s online presentation, “Genetically Engineered Crops and Foods” (<a target="_blank" href="http://www.panna.org/resources/geTutorial.html">http://www.panna.org/resources/geTutorial.html</a>).

</div>

...

<div>

Focus: The Bhopal Tragedy

In 1984, a Union Carbide pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, released 40 tons of methyl isocyanate into neighboring communities.<a name="ednref36" title="ednref36" id="ednref36" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn36">[36]</a> Estimates of the death toll in the aftermath of the leak range from Union Carbide’s 1,408 to 8,000, as reported in New Scientist Magazine.<a name="ednref37" title="ednref37" id="ednref37" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn37">[37]</a> <a name="ednref38" title="ednref38" id="ednref38" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn38">[38]</a> The Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) put the injury figure at more than 520,000.<a name="ednref39" title="ednref39" id="ednref39" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn39">[39]</a> According to ICMR, thousands have died from gas-related causes since the accident. The Bhopal disaster is often cited as the worst industrial accident in human history.

In 2001, Dow merged with Union Carbide, legally assuming all of Union Carbide’s assets and liabilities. Dow says “the Bhopal matter has been resolved for years… Union Carbide took responsibility for the tragedy…[and] agreed to pay $470 million into a trust as a settlement.”<a name="ednref40" title="ednref40" id="ednref40" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn40">[40]</a> Groups of Bhopal survivors point out that victims of the accident have received little of the settlement, which amounts to only US$350 per victim. Local groups are demanding that the company release information to doctors still treating victims of the disaster, which the companies refuse to do, citing “trade secrets.”<a name="ednref41" title="ednref41" id="ednref41" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn41">[41]</a> They also want Dow to clean up the factory (which continues to contaminate local ground water with mutagenic and carcinogenic chemicals), the extradition to India of former Union Carbide CEO Warren Anderson (who continues to evade an outstanding warrant related to the disaster) and for Union Carbide to appear in the Bhopal court where it faces charges of culpable homicide and other crimes.<a name="ednref42" title="ednref42" id="ednref42" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn42">[42]</a>

Rather than accept responsibility for harms caused by its subsidiary, Dow has taken a very combative stance. For example, in 2003 it initiated a US$10,000 lawsuit against a group of Bhopal survivors that held a peaceful protest outside of the company’s Mumbai headquarters, claiming damages due to lost productivity.<a name="ednref43" title="ednref43" id="ednref43" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn43">[43]</a>

<a name="wideRange" title="wideRange" id="wideRange"> </a>A Wide Range of Impacts

Dow’s social and environmental impacts are very broad:

Hazardous wastes As of December 2000, EPA has named Dow and Union Carbide potentially responsible parties for a combined 136 hazardous waste sites.<a name="ednref45" title="ednref45" id="ednref45" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn45">[45]</a> Seventeen of 36 Dow and Union Carbide manufacturing plants rank among the worst 20% in their class for toxic environmental releases. Twelve rank among the worst 10%.<a name="ednref46" title="ednref46" id="ednref46" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn46">[46]</a>

Asbestos Union Carbide has been held liable for exposing workers and consumers to unsafe levels of asbestos.<a name="ednref47" title="ednref47" id="ednref47" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn47">[47]</a> In December of 2002 Dow declared that its potential asbestos liabilities were 2.2 billion dollars.<a name="ednref48" title="ednref48" id="ednref48" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn48">[48]</a>

Groundwater contamination Residents of the Myrtle Grove Trailer Park are suing Dow for groundwater contamination caused by illegal rail car cleaning procedures at its Plaquemine, Louisiana, facility. Plant employees claim that for years they were instructed to clean railway cars used to transport vinyl chloride (a highly toxic, cancer-causing chemical) and other chemicals by filling them with water and dumping the resultant mix on the ground.<a name="ednref49" title="ednref49" id="ednref49" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn49">[49]</a>

Use of human subjects On at least two occasions, Dow tested the pesticide chlorpyrifos on human subjects: In 1971 on inmates at the Clinton Correctional Facility in New York<a name="ednref50" title="ednref50" id="ednref50" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn50">[50]</a> and in 1998 on students in Nebraska.<a name="ednref51" title="ednref51" id="ednref51" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn51">[51]</a> In 1965, Dow conducted dioxin tests on inmates at the Holmesburg Prison in Pennsylvania.<a name="ednref52" title="ednref52" id="ednref52" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn52">[52]</a>

Labor In April 2003, the AFL-CIO Metal Trades Department released a white paper on Dow’s 50-year history of union busting.<a name="ednref53" title="ednref53" id="ednref53" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn53">[53]</a> Between 1993 and 1995, Dow’s global restructuring strategy resulted in a 21% reduction of its workforce.<a name="ednref54" title="ednref54" id="ednref54" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn54">[54]</a> From 1952 to 1983, Union Carbide operated the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant and, according to recently uncovered memos, knowingly exposed its employees to extremely carcinogenic radioactive metals like neptunium and plutonium.<a name="ednref55" title="ednref55" id="ednref55" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn55">[55]</a>

Chemicals of mass destruction Union Carbide produced nuclear weapons components and enriched uranium for the U.S. government.<a name="ednref56" title="ednref56" id="ednref56" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn56">[56]</a> Dow produced large quantities of Agent Orange, Agent White and other defoliants, and napalm, used by the U.S. during the Vietnam War.<a name="ednref57" title="ednref57" id="ednref57" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn57">[57]</a>In 1988, Dow sold pesticides to Iraq that could be used to create chemical weapons.<a name="ednref58" title="ednref58" id="ednref58" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn58">[58]</a>

False advertising An investigation by the office of the New York State attorney general found that Dow made false and misleading advertising claims about the safety of Dursban.<a name="ednref59" title="ednref59" id="ednref59" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn59">[59]</a> In a 1994 settlement Dow agreed to stop calling their product safe, but violated its agreement. In 2003, the Attorney General sued Dow for violations of the agreement and the company was fined US$2 million.<a name="ednref60" title="ednref60" id="ednref60" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn60">[60]</a> Dow continues to make such safety claims in other countries, such as India.<a name="ednref61" title="ednref61" id="ednref61" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn61">[61]</a>

<h4><a name="focusDioxin" title="focusDioxin" id="focusDioxin"> </a>Focus: Dioxin</h4>

Two Dow herbicides (2,4-D and 2,4,5-T) contain dioxin. Dioxin exposure has been linked to cancer, developmental disabilities and organ damage. Dioxin bioaccumulates in the fat of living organisms, is highly carcinogenic and is a powerful endocrine disruptor. On multiple occasions, Dow has been directly implicated in the irresponsible release of dioxin into the environment.

Dow supplied the U.S. military with large amounts of various formulations of dioxin-laced 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T for use in defoliants like Agents Orange and White. Agent Orange was applied in Vietnam at up to 25 times the rate allowed in the U.S. long after its human toxicity was established.<a name="ednref62" title="ednref62" id="ednref62" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn62">[62]</a> Chemical producers and the U.S. government colluded to prevent information about Agent Orange’s health effects from reaching the public.<a name="ednref63" title="ednref63" id="ednref63" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn63">[63]</a> After the war, the Air Force released three studies to demonstrate that Agent Orange was not responsible for American veterans’ health problems.<a name="ednref64" title="ednref64" id="ednref64" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn64">[64]</a> It was later disclosed that the studies had been altered to remove evidence that children of fliers exposed to Agent Orange were twice as likely to be born with birth defects and that the fliers themselves were sicker than controls by a ratio of 5 to 1.<a name="ednref65" title="ednref65" id="ednref65" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn65">[65]</a> To this day, veterans groups are pursuing compensation from the U.S. government for their exposure to dioxin. Millions of Vietnamese civilians were also exposed to Agent Orange during the war. A 2002 study by The Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine found elevated levels of TCDD (the most toxic chemical in the dioxin family) in 95% of blood samples taken from residents living in Bien Hoa City, more than 30 years after spraying was stopped.<a name="ednref66" title="ednref66" id="ednref66" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn66">[66]</a>

Dioxin contamination is also a problem for local communities. The Tittabawassee River, its floodplain and much of the area surrounding Dow’s Midland, Michigan, corporate headquarters is contaminated with elevated levels of dioxin. Dow and the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) withheld information about this contamination from residents for two years,<a name="ednref67" title="ednref67" id="ednref67" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn67">[67]</a> delayed requested dioxin studies and attempted to increase substantially the maximum contaminant level for dioxin.<a name="ednref68" title="ednref68" id="ednref68" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn68">[68]</a> In 2002, MDEQ studies found an average backyard soil dioxin contamination of 529 parts per trillion for houses in the Tittabawassee River floodplain downstream from Dow’s facilities.<a name="ednref69" title="ednref69" id="ednref69" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn69">[69]</a> In 2003, more than 230 families living in dioxin-contaminated Saginaw County initiated a lawsuit against Dow Chemical seeking compensation for depreciated property values and medical monitoring.<a name="ednref70" title="ednref70" id="ednref70" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn70">[70]</a>

<a name="undueInfluence" title="undueInfluence" id="undueInfluence"> </a>Undue Influence

To advance their interests, powerhouses like Dow invest heavily in political and social influence. Dow’s methods for influencing policy and public opinion include:

Trade organizations and think tanks Industry groups work in many areas to advance the interests of their members and supporters. Some of the trade and policy organizations in which Dow participates include:

</div>

<ul>

<li>

<div>Advancement of Sound Science Coalition</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Alliance for Responsible CFC Policy (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.arap.org/">http://www.arap.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Chemistry Council (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.americanchemistry.com/">http://www.americanchemistry.com/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Council on Science and Health (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.acsh.org/">http://www.acsh.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Crop Protection Association (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.croplifeamerica.org/">http://www.croplifeamerica.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Enterprise Institute (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.aei.org/">http://www.aei.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Plastics Council (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/">http://www.americanplasticscouncil.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Solvents Council (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.americansolventscouncil.org/">http://www.americansolventscouncil.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>American Tort Reform Association (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.atra.org/">http://www.atra.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Business Roundtable (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.businessroundtable.org/">http://www.businessroundtable.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Chlorine Chemistry Council (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://c3.org/">http://c3.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Coalition for Improved Environmental Audits</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Coalition for NRD Reform</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Competitive Enterprise Institute (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.cei.org/">http://www.cei.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Council for Agricultural Science and Technology</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Council for Biotechnology Information (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.cast-science.org/">http://www.cast-science.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Environmental Policy Analysis Network</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>EuropaBio (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.europabio.org/">http://www.europabio.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Global Climate Coalition (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.globalclimate.org/">http://www.globalclimate.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>National Agricultural Chemical Association</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>National Association of Manufacturers (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.nam.org/">http://www.nam.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>National Center for Public Policy Research (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.nationalcenter.org/">http://www.nationalcenter.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Texas Chemical Council (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.txchemcouncil.org/">http://www.txchemcouncil.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>US Chamber of Commerce (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.uschamber.com/">http://www.uschamber.com/</a>)</div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Vinyl Institute (<a class="ext" target="_blank" href="http://www.vinylinfo.org/">http://www.vinylinfo.org/</a>)</div>

</li>

</ul>

<div>

Campaign contributions Dow Chemical, Dow Corning (a 50/50 joint venture between Dow Chemical and Corning) and Union Carbide political action committees (PACs) contributed a total of US$1,348,476 to federal candidates from 1994 to 2002 (73.4% to republicans)—nearly US$270,000 per election cycle.<a name="ednref71" title="ednref71" id="ednref71" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn71">[71]</a> Dow PAC’s also donated US$26,000 to George W. Bush’s Texas gubernatorial campaigns between 1993-1998,<a name="ednref72" title="ednref72" id="ednref72" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn72">[72]</a> and in 1998, Dow PACs spent US$103,640 in Texas.<a name="ednref73" title="ednref73" id="ednref73" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn73">[73]</a> Dow gave over US$1 million in soft money contributions to the Republican and Democratic parties in the 1998, 2000 and 2002 election cycles.<a name="ednref74" title="ednref74" id="ednref74" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn74">[74]</a> Dow contributed more than US$100,000 to the Bush/Cheney inauguration fund.<a name="ednref75" title="ednref75" id="ednref75" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn75">[75]</a>

Lobbying From 1998 to 2002, Dow spent US$12,210,000 on Washington lobbying—an average of more than US$2.4 million a year.<a name="ednref76" title="ednref76" id="ednref76" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn76">[76]</a> Additionally, many of Dow’s trade organizations deploy teams of lobbyists. For example, the American Chemistry Council (formerly the Chemical Manufacturers Association) spent US$4.68 million lobbying in Washington in the first half of 1996 alone.<a name="ednref77" title="ednref77" id="ednref77" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn77">[77]</a>

Revolving door Industry benefits from the movement of personnel between industry and government. Many of Dow’s leaders are former high-level government officials. Some examples include:

</div>

<ul>

<li>

<div>Barbara Hackman Franklin, former U.S. Secretary of Commerce, is a Director of Dow Chemical.<a name="ednref78" title="ednref78" id="ednref78" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn78">[78]</a></div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Harold T. Shapiro, former presidential appointee to the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, is a Director of Dow Chemical.<a name="ednref79" title="ednref79" id="ednref79" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn79">[79]</a></div>

</li>

<li>

<div>John C. Danforth, former U.S. Senator, sits on Dow’s Board of Directors.<a name="ednref80" title="ednref80" id="ednref80" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn80">[80]</a></div>

</li>

<li>

<div>Clayton K. Yeutter, former head of USDA and former U.S. Trade Representative, is now a Director of Mycogen Corporation, which is majority owned by Dow AgroSciences.<a name="ednref81" title="ednref81" id="ednref81" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn81">[81]</a></div>

</li>

<li>

<div> Kathleen M. Bader, member of the Homeland Security Advisory Panel, is Corporate Vice President at Dow.<a name="ednref82" title="ednref82" id="ednref82" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn82">[82]</a></div>

</li>

</ul>

<div>

Buying democracy In 2002, Dow contributed nearly US$400,000 to the Alliance for Better Foods’ US$5 million advertising blitz to defeat Oregon’s Proposition 27, a ballot initiative to label genetically modified foods.<a name="ednref83" title="ednref83" id="ednref83" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn83">[83]</a> Opponents outspent supporters 61 to 1.<a name="ednref84" title="ednref84" id="ednref84" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn84">[84]</a>

Public relations (PR) Dow employs the world’s top PR firms to market its products and polish its abysmal environmental record. For example, in 1994, Dow worked with PR firm Ketchum to manage press coverage of an EPA report on dioxin by conducting a 30 city PR tour with sympathetic independent scientists.<a name="ednref85" title="ednref85" id="ednref85" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn85">[85]</a>

Corporate science Corporations influence science by doing in-house research, participating in university research and government assessments, maintaining financial ties to “independent” researchers, funding think tanks, and running educational programs. For example, in 1995 Dow loaned a staff scientist to the U.S. House Commerce Committee to assist with changes to environmental, health and safety protections.<a name="ednref86" title="ednref86" id="ednref86" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn86">[86]</a> Dow serves on the Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee for EPA.<a name="ednref87" title="ednref87" id="ednref87" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn87">[87]</a> Dow gave US$100,000 in grants to members of the scientific advisory board reevaluating the toxicity of dioxin.<a name="ednref88" title="ednref88" id="ednref88" href="http://www.panna.org/campaigns/caia/corpProfilesDow.dv.html#edn88">[88]</a>

<a name="resources" title="resources" id="resources"> </a>Resources for Action

</div>

</div>

Dow chem

Attachments