chlorpyrifos organo-phosphate

==

neglected?oops 2x oops mis-spell SEE OTHER NODE

rename organo-phos 717

=2021<p class="news_content" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent; margin: 12px 0px 9px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.3; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">lINCOLN, Neb. (DTN) -- The EPA has 60 days to either write a new rule to allow for the safe use of chlorpyrifos or halt all food residue tolerances of the insecticide, which would effectively ban most uses of it, according to a ruling handed down by a federal court on Thursday.<p class="news_content" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent; margin: 12px 0px 9px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.3; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In an opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, the court said EPA has had long enough to respond to a 2007 petition by environmental groups to ban the chemical."EPA has had nearly 14 years to publish a legally sufficient response to the 2007 Petition (to ban chlorpyrifos)," the court said.<p class="news_content" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent; margin: 12px 0px 9px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.3; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"During that time, the EPA's egregious delay exposed a generation of American children to unsafe levels of chlorpyrifos. By remanding back to the EPA one last time, rather than compelling the immediate revocation of all chlorpyrifos tolerances, the court is itself being more than tolerant. But the EPA's time is now up.<p class="news_content" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent; margin: 12px 0px 9px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.3; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"The court remands this matter to the EPA with instructions to publish a legally sufficient final response to the 2007 petition within 60 days of the issuance of the mandate. That response must be a final regulation that either revokes all chlorpyrifos tolerances or modifies chlorpyrifos tolerances and makes the requisite safety findings based on aggregate exposure, including with respect to infants and children."=<a href="https://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1005-0095.pdf">https://www.panna.org/sites/default/files/EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-1005-0095.pdf</a>20121. EPA ignored genetic evidence of vulnerable populations

EPA needlessly delayed a decision regarding endocrine disrupting effects
EPA ignored data regarding cancer risks
EPA’s CRA misrepresented risks, failed to apply FQPA 10X safety factor3
EPA over-relied on registrant data
EPA failed to properly address the exporting hazard from chlorpyrifos
EPA failed to quantitatively incorporate data demonstrating long-lasting effects from

early life exposure to chlorpyrifos in children

EPA disregarded data demonstrating that there is no evidence of a safe level of exposure

during pre-birth and early life stages

EPA failed to cite or quantitatively incorporate studies and clinical reports suggesting

potential adverse effects below 10% cholinesterase inhibition

EPA failed to incorporate inhalation routes of exposure <div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/159943/scott-pruitt-epa-whistleblower">https://newrepublic.com/article/159943/scott-pruitt-epa-whistleblower</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">NO LNX MANY</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Natasha Geiling/October 26, 2020</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Scott Pruitt Was Even More Selfish and Vengeful Than We Thought</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">A new lawsuit sheds light on whistleblower retaliation at the Environmental Protection Agency.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Scott Pruitt speaks at the Faith and Freedom Coalition Road to Majority Policy Conference.]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">When former Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt resigned in July 2018 amid a flurry of ethics scandals, he had already weathered months of inquiries into inappropriate use of the office for personal gain. He had spent over $100,000 of taxpayer money on first-class flights to Italy and Morocco. He had installed a $43,000 private phone booth in EPA headquarters. He ordered the locks in EPA headquarters to be replaced with biometric locks, even though he couldn’t explain to a member of Congress what biometric locks are. And all the while, he paid $50 a night for a condo on Capitol Hill owned by the wife of a lobbyist—a lobbyist whose clients are regulated by the EPA.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Even amid Pruitt’s nonstop public relations nightmares, he maintained President Trump’s support, which made it feel like Pruitt could get away with everything. In the end, there wasn’t a single scandal, or final straw, that precipitated his downfall—it was the endless parade of them. In his resignation letter, Pruitt said that he and his family were victims of “unrelenting attacks.” Trump, for his part, said that Pruitt told him he didn’t want to be a “distraction” for the administration.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The subtext, of course, was that if Pruitt had managed to keep his lavish spending and cozy relationship with lobbyists quiet, he could have stayed atop the EPA indefinitely. Which explains why, days after Pruitt’s resignation, one of the EPA officials who blew the whistle on Pruitt’s behavior took credit for his departure.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>“I hate to take a credit for a man losing his job, but I guess I’d have to say that I take the credit,” Kevin Chmielewski, a former EPA employee, told The Hill in July 2018. Chmielewski, who served as deputy chief of staff for operations at the agency throughout most of Pruitt’s tenure, took issue with what he saw as Pruitt’s “chronic abuse of taxpayer dollars.” Chmielewski took concerns about Pruitt directly to the White House and, eventually, to congressional Democrats. In response, Chmielewski was placed on administrative leave without pay. He was one of four EPA officials who were reassigned or demoted or who left the agency because they flagged Pruitt’s ethical and financial misconduct.</div><div>
</div><div>Now comes the long-awaited postscript in this chaotic saga. In a new lawsuit filed in federal court on October 20, Chmielewski paints an even harsher picture of administrative retribution. According to the lawsuit, on February 12, 2018—the day after The Washington Post broke the story about Pruitt’s first-class travel habits—Chmielewski came to work only to find that he had been locked out of his office. He was subsequently escorted from the building and told that if he did not resign, he would be fired from the EPA. Chmielewski did not resign, but a few months later, he was informed in a letter that he was considered to have resigned from the EPA effective March 17, 2018.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chmielewski’s lawsuit seems to confirm the toxic work environment previously reported at the EPA under Pruitt’s leadership. But the lawsuit also highlights, more specifically, the extent to which Pruitt’s tenure was driven by selfishness. The EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment; Scott Pruitt’s mission was to protect himself and his cronies.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>“Our job is to enforce the law,” Pruitt told Time in October 2017, railing against the previous administration, which he said had “taken those statutes and stretched them so far.” But when it came time actually to enforce the law, Pruitt supported cutting funds to the EPA’s enforcement office. In the first two years of the Trump administration—the two years in which Pruitt was at the helm of the EPA—prosecutions of environmental crimes, which are investigated by the EPA and pursued by the Department of Justice, dropped precipitously. According to a recent study from the University of Michigan, prosecutions under the country’s two landmark environmental laws, the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, declined by 50 percent and 70 percent, respectively.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>Instead, when Pruitt took action, it was always to protect himself and the industry-connected donors who had fueled his political rise. According to a since-deleted tweet Pruitt sent in January 2018, Trump’s deregulatory agenda, carried out at the EPA by Pruitt, saved industry $300 million in regulatory costs. That the repealed regulations would have prevented thousands of premature deaths, heart attacks, and asthma attacks received no mention in Pruitt’s tweet.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>When Pruitt tried to defend his first-class plane trips, he blamed “a very toxic environment, politically.” His concern over toxicity apparently did not extend to children and farmworkers sickened by pesticides. In March 2017, in one of his first acts as EPA administrator, Pruitt rejected the recommendation of EPA scientists to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos on farms. Scientists cited studies connecting use of chlorpyrifos to declines in cognitive health, particularly among young children. Pruitt cited the need for “regulatory certainty.” He did not mention that, 20 days earlier, he had met with the CEO of Dow Chemical, who had also contributed $1 million to Trump’s inauguration.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">When viewed in light of Pruitt’s history at the EPA, the allegations in Chmielewski’s lawsuit reveal a familiar pattern of a man far more concerned with self-preservation than ethical considerations. In an EPA typified by deregulation and delay, Chmielewski claims he was elbowed out a day after The Washington Post broke the story about Pruitt’s first-class travel. But it makes sense that retribution would come swiftly for someone who broke Pruitt’s cardinal rule: Never put other people before yourself.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Natasha Geiling @ngeiling</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Natasha Geiling is an environmental writer living in Berkeley, California.</div></div><div>=</div><div></div><div>
</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/the-epa-allows-continued-use-of-a-neurotoxin-found-to-harm-kids-brains/">https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/the-epa-allows-continued-use-of-a-neurotoxin-found-to-harm-kids-brains/</a></div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">
</div><div>an 920</div><div>
</div><div style="font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large"><div class="mag-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px 0px 19px; padding: 0px; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3 class="magcat-titlte entry-title" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; letter-spacing: 1px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/09/the-epa-allows-continued-use-of-a-neurotoxin-found-to-harm-kids-brains/" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer; display: block; letter-spacing: 0px; line-height: 1.4;"> EPA allows continued use of a neurotoxin found to harm kids’ brains</a></h3><div class="grid-post-box-meta mag-meta" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 7px 0px 0px; padding: 0px;"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/brettwilkins/" title="Posts by Brett Wilkins" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Brett Wilkins</a> / <a href="https://www.alternet.org/author/common-dreams/" title="Posts by Common Dreams" class="author url fn" rel="author" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; transition: color 0.3s ease 0s; cursor: pointer;">Common Dreams</a></div></div><div class="mag-excerpt entry-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Dismissing extensive scientific evidence showing that even low levels of chlorpyrifos damage children’s brains, the Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday released a risk assessment calling the toxic pesticide’s effects “unresolved”…

no lnx 2 cid one pbs newshour
Dismissing extensive scientific evidence showing that even low levels of chlorpyrifos damage children’s brains, the Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday released a risk assessment calling the toxic pesticide’s effects “unresolved” and allowing its continued use in a wide variety of agricultural products pending a future final decision on its use.
Reacting to the EPA’s move, Patti Goldman, managing attorney at Earthjustice, accused the agency of “ignoring decades of science by leading universities and in doing so, neglecting its duty to protect children from pesticides.”
“Ignoring the demonstrated harm to children doesn’t make chlorpyrifos safe, it just shows a commitment to keep a toxic pesticide in the market and in our food at all cost,” Goldman added.The EPA’s third risk assessment (pdf) for chlorpyrifos, which is the result of litigation by environmental groups, stated that “the science addressing [the pesticide’s] neurodevelopmental effects remains unresolved.” This, despite the study finding some dietary risks to adults, children, and handlers of the chemical, as well dangers to animals.Chlorpyrifos is an organophosphate pesticide applied to crops, animals, and buildings to eliminate insects and worms, killing them by attacking their nervous systems through acetylcholinesterase enzyme inhibition. Invented by Dow Chemical Company in 1966, it is classified as “moderately hazardous” (pdf) to humans by the World Health Organization. Chlorpyrifos was banned in 2000 for most household uses but is still applied to dozens of crops on over 40,000 farms.
Last December, the European Union voted to effectively ban chlorpyrifos. Thailand also tried to ban the pesticide, but backed down last year under pressure from the Trump administration to continue buying it.
In 2016 under the Obama administration, EPA scientists found that chlorpyrifos poisons food and drinking water and recommended a ban on the pesticide, citing extensive research of its effects on children and agricultural workers. The pesticide has poisoned farmworkers, and researchers at Columbia University (pdf), Stanford University (pdf), the University of California at Berkeley (pdf), and elsewhere have shown that it is neurotoxic and damages children’s brains by, among other harms, delaying development, damaging memory, lowering IQ, and reducing attention span.
However, in March 2017 then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt rejected his own agency’s scientific findings and issued a ruling (pdf) upholding use of the neurotoxin. The American Academy of Pediatrics said it was “deeply alarmed” by Pruitt’s decision, which came after consultations with lobby groups including the American Farm Bureau Association.
Corteva Inc., which is owned by Dow Chemical and is the largest producer of chlorpyrifos, has also been lobbying the EPA, according to Earthjustice, one of the groups suing to ban the chemical. Progressive Farmer reported Wednesday that Corteva will phase out chlorpyrifos production, citing declining demand as the primary factor in its decision.
In 2017, the attorneys general of seven states—New York, California, Washington, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Vermont—formally called on the EPA to take immediate action to ban chlorpyrifos. Absent action from the Trump administration, Hawaii in 2018 became the first state to ban pesticides containing the chemical, although the ban won’t go into effect until 2022. California and New York followed suit, while lawmakers in several other states have introduced bills to ban it.In a major victory for chemical corporations, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler announced in July 2019 that the agency would not ban chlorpyrifos, prompting a lawsuit by a coalition of health and labor organizations.
“Trump’s EPA might want to dismiss the science and the law to protect corporate profit, but we are confident the courts won’t stand for this,” said Dr. Elena Rios, president of the National Hispanic Medical Association, at the time.
Many scientists have expressed alarm that the U.S. government is upholding chlorpyrifos use.
“Strong evidence now supports the notion that organophosphate pesticides damage the fetal brain and produce cognitive and behavioral dysfunction through multiple mechanisms, including thyroid disruption,” wrote Leonardo Trasande, a professor of pediatrics, environmental medicine, and population health at New York University School of Medicine, in 2017.
“A regulatory ban was proposed, but actions to end the use of one such pesticide, chlorpyrifos, in agriculture were recently stopped by the Environmental Protection Agency under false scientific pretenses,” Trasande added. “Scientists have a responsibility to rebut and decry these serious challenges to human health and scientific integrity.”
“There are all these studies that have been done of kids showing that chlorpyrifos harms their brains especially as they’re young or fetuses as they’re developing,” Erik D. Olson of the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC)—one of the groups fighting for a chlorpyrifos ban—told The Hill on Tuesday. “The very young are at much greater susceptibility than older people, and also more exposed.”
NRDC said that “EPA political appointees are pushing to not only ignore the epidemiological studies showing children are harmed by real-world uses of chlorpyrifos, but to also strip away the ‘uncertainty factors’ that are routinely applied to add a measure of protection for children, and to address uncertainties in the risk assessment.”
The EPA’s final decision on chlorpyrifos will be made at a future date, with most experts believing the latest risk assessment points to approval or an inadequate offer to limit its use.
“With how toxic it is you can’t mitigate the harm enough to make sure not really impacting people’s lives and health and the environment,” Nathan Donley, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, told The Hill.</div></div><div></div><div>=</div><div><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body css-listicle-body-2639209982" style="margin-top: -15px; line-height: 1.5; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description" style="clear: both;"> Elliott NeginOn July 8, President Trump <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/08/us/politics/trump-environment-climate-change.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">hosted</a> a White House event to unabashedly tout his truly abysmal environmental record. The following day, coincidentally, marked the one-year anniversary of Andrew Wheeler at the helm of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), first as acting administrator and then as administrator after the Senate confirmed him in late February.The good news, if there is any, is that Wheeler is an Eagle Scout compared to his <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-25/here-s-a-scorecard-of-the-scott-pruitt-investigations-quicktake" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">ethically challenged</a> predecessor, Scott Pruitt. The bad news is, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/05/climate/wheeler-epa-pruitt.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">as predicted</a>, Wheeler has been more effective than Pruitt in rolling back and eliminating EPA safeguards.My organization, the Union of Concerned Scientists, has compiled a <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/center-science-and-democracy/state-of-science-trump-era" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">list</a> of 80 Trump administration attacks on science since taking office, and Wheeler has been the driving force behind many of them. Below are 10 of the more egregious ways he has undermined the EPA's time-honored role to protect public health and the environment so far.<div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="1" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem1"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">1. Sidelined Scientists</h3>Wheeler, a former coal industry lobbyist, has taken a number of steps to systematically reduce the role of scientists in the agency's policymaking process. Last fall, for example, he <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/climate/epa-science-adviser.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; background-color: initial;">eliminated</a> the agency's Office of the Science Advisor, which counseled the EPA administrator on research supporting health and environmental standards, and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/climate/epa-etzel-children-health-program.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; background-color: initial;">placed</a> the head of the EPA's Office of Children's Health Protection on administrative leave. He also <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/climate/epa-disbands-pollution-science-panel.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; background-color: initial;">disbanded</a> a 20-member scientific advisory committee on particulate matter, or soot; <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060102455" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; background-color: initial;">failed</a> to convene a similar panel on ozone; and <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060102455" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5; background-color: initial;">packed</a> a seven-member advisory committee on air quality standards with industry-friendly participants.
</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="2" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem2"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">2. Proposed to Restrict the Use of Scientific Data</h3>Claiming his intent is to increase "transparency," Wheeler is promoting a rule Pruitt proposed that would dramatically limit the scientific studies the agency considers when developing health standards. If adopted, the rule would restrict the use of scientific studies in EPA decisions if the underlying data are not public and reproducible, which would disqualify many epidemiological and other health studies the EPA relies on to set science-based public safeguards. Given that EPA health standards often rely on studies that contain private patient information, as well as confidential business information that cannot be revealed, the rule would significantly hamper the agency's ability to carry out its mission. Wheeler <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/421479-epa-to-pursue-final-science-transparency-rule-in-2019" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">plans</a> to finalize the rule sometime this year.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="3" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem3"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">3. Gutted the Coal Ash Rule</h3>The first major <a href="https://www.epa.gov/coalash/coal-ash-rule" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">rule</a> Wheeler signed as acting administrator refuted his claim that he could fulfill President Trump's <a href="https://www.apnews.com/0012648e385d41f481f0af20a90f0666" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">directive</a> to "clean up the air, clean up the water, and provide regulatory relief" at the same time. By rolling back the Obama-era coal ash rule, Wheeler provided regulatory relief to his old friend the coal industry by weakening environmental protections established in 2015 to clean up coal ash ponds, which are laced with toxic contaminants that leak into groundwater. The move was a <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060083703" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">top priority</a> for coal baron Bob Murray, owner of Murray Energy, Wheeler's <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/epas-acting-administrator-has-long-lobbying-record-on-issues-before-the-agency/2018/07/05/a591cd40-6a6b-11e8-bea7-c8eb28bc52b1_story.html?utm_term=.07ea8ecca216" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">most lucrative client</a> when he worked for the Faegre Baker Daniels law firm.Coal-fired power plants have been dumping this residue from burning coal into giant, unlined pits for <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/07/02/us/ap-us-coal-ash-liability.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">decades</a>. According to the EPA, there are more than <a href="https://www.epa.gov/coalash/frequent-questions-about-2015-coal-ash-disposal-rule#3" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">1,000 coal ash disposal sites</a> across the country, and a recent <a href="https://www.environmentalintegrity.org/news/first-comprehensive-national-study-of-coal-ash-pollution-finds-widespread-groundwater-contamination/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">analysis</a> by Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project found that 91 percent of the coal plants filing monitoring data required by the 2015 rule are polluting water with unsafe levels of toxic contaminants. Wheeler's EPA <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-finalizes-first-amendments-coal-ash-disposal-regulations-providing-flexibilities" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">says</a> the new rule—which extends the deadline for closing some leaking ash ponds and allows states to suspend groundwater monitoring and set their own standards—will save utilities as much as $31 million. But the agency ignored the enormous costs of cancer and neurological and cardiovascular diseases <a href="https://www.psr.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/coal-ash-hazardous-to-human-health.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">linked</a> to coal ash ingredients, which include arsenic, chromium, lead and mercury.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="4" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem4"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">4. Recommended Unsafe Levels of Drinking Water Contaminants</h3>Poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which are used in firefighting foam and a variety of nonstick, cleaning, packaging and other household products, have been <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/23/pfas-everyday-products-toxics-guide" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">linked</a> to thyroid disease and kidney, liver, pancreatic and testicular cancer. According to a recent <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/drinking-water-may-contain-pfas-chemicals-in-43-states-according-to-new-study-by-environmental-working-group/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">study</a> by the Environmental Working Group and Northeastern University, these chemicals threaten the drinking water supplies of an estimated 19 million Americans. A 2018 Union of Concerned Scientists <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/center-science-and-democracy/preserving-science-based-safeguards/toxic-threat-pfas-contamination-military-bases" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">report</a>, meanwhile, found that PFAS water contamination at 130 military bases across the country exceed the 11-parts-per-trillion safety threshold determined by the Department of Health and Human Services Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Nearly two-thirds of the sites had contamination that was more than 100 times higher than the safe level.In February, Wheeler <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-acting-administrator-announces-first-ever-comprehensive-nationwide-pfas-action-plan" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">announced</a> the "first-ever nationwide action plan" to regulate PFAS chemicals in water, saying the agency would develop and set a limit for two of the most prevalent PFAS chemicals, perfluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid. During the announcement, he <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/politics/epa-pfas-water-plan/index.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">told</a> reporters he believes the agency's voluntary 70-part-per-trillion health-advisory level for the chemicals is "a safe level for drinking water," despite the fact that this level is more than six times higher than what the Disease Registry considers safe.While Wheeler slow-walks the EPA's response, members of Congress have introduced at least a <a href="https://saferchemicals.org/2019/05/29/communities-call-on-congress-to-act-on-pfas/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">dozen</a>bills to address PFAS contamination, and the <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/450706-senate-vote-requires-military-epa-to-deal-with-harmful-forever" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">Senate recently passed</a> a defense bill that would require the EPA to set a science-based standard for PFAS in drinking water.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="5" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem5"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">5. Rolled Back Clean Water Act Protections</h3>Clearing up a decade-long dispute over the scope of the Clean Water Act, the Obama EPA <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/28/us/obama-epa-clean-water-pollution.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">adopted</a> a broad, science-based definition of the law that included protecting intermittent and ephemeral streams and wetlands that do not have surface water connections to other waterways. A <a href="https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=296414" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">2015 EPA meta-analysis</a> of more than 1,200 peer-reviewed studies concluded that even infrequently flowing small streams and isolated wetlands can affect "the integrity of downstream waters." Trash them and that pollution could wind up in rivers, lakes, reservoirs and estuaries.Regardless, Wheeler <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-and-army-propose-new-waters-united-states-definition" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">announced</a> plans during a December telephone press briefing to reverse the Obama EPA definition of waters protected by the Clean Water Act, a thinly disguised gift to land developers and the agriculture industry. When asked what wetlands would no longer be protected, Wheeler <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060109323/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">replied</a>, "We have not done … a detailed mapping of all the wetlands in the country." Likewise, EPA Office of Water head David Ross—who <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060058019" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">represented industry clients</a> against the EPA before joining the Trump administration—<a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060109323/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">told</a> reporters on the call that the agency had no idea how many streams would be dropped from Clean Water Act protection under the proposal.In fact, Wheeler and Ross were well aware of the damage their new definition would do. At least 18 percent of streams and 51 percent of wetlands across the country would not be covered under their proposed definition, according to an internal 2017 <a href="https://www.eenews.net/assets/2018/12/11/document_gw_05.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">slideshow</a> prepared by the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers and <a href="https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060109323" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">obtained by E&E News</a> under the Freedom of Information Act.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="6" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem6"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">6. Suppressed an Inconvenient Formaldehyde Report</h3>Last August, Wheeler disingenuously told a Senate committee that the EPA was holding up the release of a report on the risk of cancer from formaldehyde to confirm its veracity. "I am sure we will release it," he <a href="https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/cache/files/a/f/afffe2f0-6008-4c2a-af13-87d1cb26d6be/7564C79E99E118F3853D747150119932.spw-080118.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">said</a>, "but I need to make sure that the science in the report is still accurate."In fact, the report—which concluded that formaldehyde can cause leukemia and nose and throat cancer—was completed by EPA scientists a year before Wheeler testified, according to <a href="https://www.markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Pruitt%20Letter%20formaldehyde%20assessment.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">a Senate investigation</a>, and their conclusion was hardly a surprise. Both the World Health Organization's <a href="https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono100F-29.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">International Agency for Research on Cancer</a> and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services <a href="https://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/newsroom/releases/2011/june10/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">National Toxicology Program</a> have already classified formaldehyde as a known human carcinogen.The EPA's review process normally takes <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/29/climate/epa-mercury-emissions.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">60 to 90 days</a>. The formaldehyde report has been in limbo for at least a year and a half, a blatant giveaway to the <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/toxic-influence-how-a-che_b_8307272" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">American Chemistry Council</a>, the U.S. chemical industry's premier trade association, which has <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/sowing-uncertainty-about-science-formaldehyde-decades" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">blocked tighter restrictions</a> on formaldehyde for decades.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="7" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem7"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">7. Ignored EPA Scientists’ Advice to Ban Asbestos</h3>Instead of <a href="https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/815-e-p-a-memos-on-asbestos/12c87a96be998db10048/optimized/full.pdf#page=1" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">heeding the advice</a> of agency scientists and lawyers to follow the example of <a href="https://tinyurl.com/y5x2k32p" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">55 other countries</a> and ban asbestos completely, the EPA <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-strengthens-regulation-asbestos-close-loophole-and-protect-consumers" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">announced</a> in April that it would tighten restrictions on asbestos—not ban it—despite overwhelming scientific evidence of its dangers. Manufacturers will be able to continue to use the substance if they obtain EPA approval.Asbestos has not been produced in the United States <a href="https://www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managing-chemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-asbestos-0" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">since 2002</a>, but is still imported for use in a wide range of commercial and consumer products, including auto brake components, roofing, vinyl floor tile, fire-resistant clothing, and cement pipes, sheets and shingles. One of the deadliest known carcinogens, asbestos kills <a href="https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180416005884/en/ADAO-Announces-New-Findings-Show-Asbestos-Related-Deaths" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">nearly 40,000</a> Americans annually, mainly from lung cancer.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="8" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem8"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">8. Weakened the Mercury Emissions Rule</h3>In late December, the EPA proposed to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/28/climate/mercury-coal-pollution-regulations.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">significantly weaken</a> a rule restricting mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants by recalculating its costs and benefits. The Obama EPA, which issued the rule in 2011, estimated it would cost utilities <a href="https://www.epa.gov/mats/regulatory-actions-final-mercury-and-air-toxics-standards-mats-power-plants" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">$7.4 billion to $9.6 billion</a> annually to install pollution controls and lead to <a href="https://www.epa.gov/mats/healthier-americans#impacts" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">$37 billion to $90 billion</a> in health benefits by reducing not only mercury, a potent neurotoxin, but also sulfur dioxide and soot, thus preventing 130,000 asthma attacks, 4,700 heart attacks, and as many as 11,000 premature deaths. The Wheeler EPA ignored the "co-benefits" of limiting sulfur dioxide and soot, and flagrantly <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/28/climate/mercury-coal-pollution-regulations.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">lowballed</a> the health benefits of curbing mercury alone at only $4 million to $6 million annually.Most utilities have already complied with the mercury rule at <a href="https://tinyurl.com/y5885qy4" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">a fraction of the estimated cost</a>, but health advocates fear that this new, industry-friendly accounting method, which makes it appear that the cost to polluters far outweigh the rule's benefits, will <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/energy-environment/2018/12/28/epa-make-it-harder-tighten-mercury-rules-future/?utm_term=.84be4559d80d" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">set a precedent</a> for the EPA to sabotage an array of other public health protections.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="9" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem9"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">9. Slammed Vehicle Emission Rules Into Reverse</h3>Last August, the EPA and the Transportation Department <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2018/08/02/trump-epa-fuel-economy-standards/887683002/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">issued</a> a proposal to freeze vehicle tailpipe pollution and fuel efficiency standards, rolling back a 2012 Obama-era rule requiring automakers to boost passenger vehicle fuel economy to a fleetwide average of 54 miles per gallon by 2025. In a Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/make-cars-great-again-1533170415" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">opinion piece</a> titled "Make Cars Great Again" published a few days before the two agencies announced their proposal, Wheeler and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao charged that the Obama-era standards—the first to limit vehicle carbon emissions—are too burdensome for automakers and "raised the cost and decreased the supply of newer, safer vehicles."Parroting the Trump administration's <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/climate/trump-fuel-economy.html?module=inline" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">line of reasoning</a>, Wheeler and Chao argued that fuel-efficient cars—which weigh less than gas-guzzlers—are not as safe, a contention that has been widely <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/02/climate/trump-fuel-economy.html?module=inline" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">debunked</a>. In fact, a 2017 <a href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w23340" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">study</a> concluded that reducing the average weight of new vehicles could result in fewer traffic fatalities.In any case, freezing the standards at 2020 levels would be hard on the planet, not to mention Americans' wallets, <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-cooke/new-epa-administrator-same-bad-idea-car-standard-rollbacks-would-be-awful" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">according to</a> the Union of Concerned Scientists. It would result in an additional 2.2 billion metric tons of global warming emissions by 2040, amounting to 170 million metric tons in 2040 alone—the equivalent of the annual output of 43 average size coal-fired power plants. It also would cost drivers billions of dollars. In 2040 alone, they would have to pay an additional $55 billion to fill their gas tanks. Meanwhile, the design improvements automakers have made so far to meet the standards have already saved drivers more than <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/fuel-economy-ticker?ga=2.130369487.1908070918.1561988567-899698819.1546975208" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">$86 trillion</a> at the pump since 2012, and off-the-shelf technological fixes, the Union of Concerned Scientists says, would enable automakers to meet the original 2025 target.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="10" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem10"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">10. Rescinded the Clean Power Plan</h3>Perhaps Wheeler's most damaging move to date came late last month when he <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/6/19/18684054/climate-change-clean-power-plan-repeal-affordable-emissions" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">signed</a> a final rule to repeal and replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, which would have required coal-fired power plants to dramatically cut their carbon emissions. Yet another gift to the coal industry, Wheeler's so-called Affordable Clean Energy rule grants states the authority to determine emissions standards but sets no targets, leaving them the option to do absolutely nothing.Before Wheeler released the final rule, an April <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aafe25" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">study</a> in the journal Environmental Research Letters found that his draft version would boost carbon emissions in 18 states and the District of Columbia and increase sulfur dioxide emissions in 19 states. The EPA's own <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/climate/epa-coal-pollution-deaths.html?module=inline" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">analysis</a> of the draft rule, meanwhile, found that the proposal could have led to as many as 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 due to an increase in soot, and as many as 15,000 cases of upper respiratory problems.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-id="11" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem11"><h3 style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between; align-items: center;">Reversing Decades of Bipartisan Protections</h3>If Wheeler truly cared about transparency, he would petition the Trump administration to change the name of his agency to "Every Polluter's Ally." In just 12 months, he has killed or weakened dozens of safeguards with the sole intention of bolstering polluting industries' profit margins even after Congress slashed the corporate tax rate. As a result, millions of Americans will be drinking filthier water and breathing dirtier air, and more will suffer from serious diseases, according to his agency's own accounting.Wheeler and his predecessor Pruitt have sullied the bipartisan track record of one of the nation's agencies entrusted with protecting public health and safety. So it is little wonder that three former EPA administrators who, notably, served under Republican presidents, recently <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11062019/epa-climate-change-anti-science-rebuke-gop-former-administrators-thomas-whitman-reilly-mccarthy" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">sounded the alarm</a> on Capitol Hill, urging legislators to step up their oversight of the agency and denouncing its attempts to hamstring science."There is no doubt in my mind that under the current administration the EPA is retreating from its historic mission to protect our environment and the health of the public from environmental hazards," former EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman, who served under President George W. Bush, stated in her <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/files/documents/Testimony%20-%20Todd%20Whitman%2020190611.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">written testimony</a> for the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations. "This administration, from the beginning, has made no secret of its intention to essentially dismantle the EPA…. Therefore, I urge this committee, in the strongest possible terms, to exercise Congress's oversight responsibilities over the actions and direction of the EPA."</div>This article was produced by <a href="https://independentmediainstitute.org/earth-food-life/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">Earth | Food | Life</a>, a project of the Independent Media Institute, and originally published by <a href="https://truthout.org/articles/10-ways-andrew-wheeler-has-decimated-epa-protections-in-just-one-year/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">Truthout</a>.Elliott Negin is a senior writer at the <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">Union of Concerned Scientists</a>.<div class="post-pager js-listicle-pager" data-async_load_parameters="platform=desktop&display_ads=1&settings=%7B%22enter_url%22%3A+false%2C+%22no_post_section%22%3A+false%2C+%22ads_breaks%22%3A+null%2C+%22prevent_last_break_repetition%22%3A+false%2C+%22use_numeration%22%3A+false%2C+%22ads_order%22%3A+%5B%5D%2C+%22pagination_order%22%3A+%5B%5D%2C+%22list_breaks%22%3A+null%2C+%22reorder_voting%22%3A+false%2C+%22cooldown_in_seconds%22%3A+null%2C+%22source%22%3A+%22post_listicle_settings%22%2C+%22next_post_url%22%3A+null%2C+%22up_down_voting%22%3A+false%2C+%22show_columns_on_mobile%22%3A+false%2C+%22numeration_sort%22%3A+-1%2C+%22use_pagination%22%3A+false%2C+%22body_text_above%22%3A+false%2C+%22use_ads%22%3A+false%2C+%22items_as_posts%22%3A+false%2C+%22multiple_answers%22%3A+false%2C+%22no_redirect%22%3A+false%2C+%22is_guest_voting_allowed%22%3A+true%2C+%22layout_type%22%3A+1%7D" data-listicle-style="" style="display: table; width: 780px;"><div class="tags" style="margin: 20px 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">epa</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/andrew-wheeler" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">andrew wheeler</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/environment" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">environment</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/donald-trump" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">donald trump</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">scott pruitt</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">fossil fuels</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pollution" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">pollution</a> <a class="tagsitem" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/health" style="text-decoration-line: none; margin: 4px 2px; display: inline-block; line-height: 1; border-radius: 20px; border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); padding: 6px 11px;">health</a></div></div><div></div> OMGtrump epa fail<a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/a-total-disgrace-outrage-as-trump-epa-says-it-wont-ban-pesticide-linked-to-brain-damage-in-children">https://www.alternet.org/2019/07/a-total-disgrace-outrage-as-trump-epa-says-it-wont-ban-pesticide-linked-to-brain-damage-in-children</a>no lnx
' A total disgrace’: Outrage as Trump EPA says it won’t ban pesticide linked to brain damage in childrenWritten by Jake Johnson / Common Dreams July 19, 2019In a move environmentalists denounced as yet another case of the Trump administration putting industry profits over public health, the Environmental Protection Agency announced on Thursday that it will not ban chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to brain damage in children.“By allowing chlorpyrifos to stay in our fruits and vegetables, Trump’s EPA is breaking the law and neglecting the overwhelming scientific evidence that this pesticide harms children’s brains,” Patti Goldman, attorney with Earthjustice said in a statement. “It is a tragedy that this administration sides with corporations instead of children’s health.”EPA chief Andrew Wheeler’s decision to reject a petition by environmental groups calling for a ban on the neurotoxic chemical ignores the assessments of his agency’s own scientists, said Tiffany Finck-Haynes, pesticides and pollinators program manager for Friends of the Earth.“The EPA’s refusal to ban chlorpyrifos ignores decades of science showing that this pesticide has irrevocable effects on human health and the environment,” said Finck-Haynes. “The EPA is endangering the lives of children to protect pesticide industry profits.”Friends of the Earth@foe_us Today Trump's @EPA announced that it will not #BanChlorpyrifos — a brain-damaging pesticide that EPA's own scientists have deemed unsafe at any level."The EPA is endangering the lives of children to protect pesticide industry profits."https://foe.org/news/trumps-epa-continues-delay-federal-ban-brain-damaging-pesticide-chlorpyrifos-leaving-states-take-action/ …Trump’s EPA continues to delay federal ban on the brain-damaging pesticide chlorpyrifos, leaving...Today, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it will not ban the neurotoxic, brain-damaging pesticide chlorpyrifos. Last summer, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals...foe.orgChlorpyrifos has been banned for household use since 2000, but the pesticide is still used by farmers on “more than 50 fruit, nut, cereal, and vegetable crops,” according to the New York Times.“In 2016,” the Times reported, “more than 640,000 acres were treated with chlorpyrifos in California alone.”The Obama administration in 2015 proposed banning use of the pesticide on food crops, but former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt authorized its continued use in 2017.“This is a total disgrace,” Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) tweeted in response to the EPA’s decision on Thursday.Finck-Haynes of Friends of the Earth said that as the federal government continues to work on behalf of chemical interests, states must take immediate action to protect the public and the environment.“While the federal government refuses to act, we urge states to step in, ban chlorpyrifos, and demonstrate that they will safeguard public health and the environment,” said Finck-Haynes. “We call on [New York] Governor [Andrew] Cuomo to sign the chlorpyrifos ban bill sitting on his desk and protect New Yorkers from this toxic pesticide.”In a statement on Thursday, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) highlighted the Trump administration’s ties to Dow Chemical, the largest producer of chlorpyrifos in the United States.“The relationship between President Trump and Dow Chemical… has been called into question,” the group said. “Among other things, the chemical manufacturing giant reportedly donated $1 million for Trump’s inauguration, and its CEO previously played a chief advisory role to the president, heading up his now defunct American Manufacturing Council.”Erik Olson, senior director of health and food at NRDC, said the effort to achieve a ban on chlorpyrifos will continue.“Until EPA gets this stuff out of our fields and off our food,” said Olson, “this fight is not over.”= <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/chlorpyrifos-epa-ban-2594491287.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/chlorpyrifos-epa-ban-2594491287.html</a>
Court Rebukes EPA, Orders Ban on Pesticide That Harms Kids’ Brains<div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url" data-elid="2594491287" data-authors="Environmental Working Group" data-headline="Court Rebukes EPA, Orders Ban on Pesticide That Harms Kids’ Brains" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description">In <a href="http://src.bna.com/A2j" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">a scathing opinion</a>, a federal court on Thursday ordered the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/epa" style="text-decoration-line: none;">EPA</a>) to ban <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" style="text-decoration-line: none;">chlorpyrifos</a>, a toxic <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" style="text-decoration-line: none;">pesticide</a> linked to brain damage in children.The ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals nullified the <a href="https://www.ewg.org/release/epa-chief-scraps-scheduled-ban-pesticide-harms-kids-brains#.W2xq5C-ZNBw" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">decision</a> last year by then-EPA Administrator <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Scott Pruitt</a> to cancel the agency's proposal to ban chlorpyrifos—an insecticide that in small doses can harm children's brains and nervous systems—from use on <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/food/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">food</a> crops.Pruitt's reversal of the proposed ban came a few weeks after he met with the CEO of Dow Chemical Company, the world's largest manufacturer of chlorpyrifos, <a href="https://www.apnews.com/2350d7be5e24469ab445089bf663cdcb" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">according to</a> The Associated Press.In the Ninth Circuit's opinion, released Thursday morning, District Judge Jed Rakoff blasted the EPA's actions, stating that there "remains no justification for the EPA's 'continued failure to respond to the pressing health concerns presented by chlorpyrifos,' which has now placed the agency in direct contravention" of federal laws regulating food and pesticides."Today's court decision is a huge victory for public health, especially that of children," said Melanie Benesh, legislative attorney for the <a href="https://www.ewg.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Environmental Working Group</a>. "By requiring the EPA to finally ban chlorpyrifos, the Ninth Circuit is ensuring that the agency puts children's health, strong science and the letter of the law above corporate interests."The Ninth Circuit decision orders the EPA to revoke all tolerances and cancel all registrations for chlorpyrifos within 60 days....</div></div> =<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/california-pesticides-health-2539988928.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/california-pesticides-health-2539988928.html</a>
<div class="headline-container" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="headline h1" style="margin: 10px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 31px;">California Court Ruling Ends Decades of State Pesticide Spraying</h1></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url" data-elid="2539988928" data-authors="Center for Biological Diversity" data-headline="California Court Ruling Ends Decades of State Pesticide Spraying" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="body-description">A judge has ordered the California Department of Food and Agriculture to stop using chemical <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" style="text-decoration-line: none;">pesticides</a> in its statewide program until the agency complies with state environmental laws.

The <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/pesticides_reduction/pdfs/2018-2-22-California-Dept-of-Food-and-Ag-pesticides-ruling.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">injunction</a>, issued late last week, is a sweeping victory for 11 public-health, conservation, citizen and food-safety groups and the city of Berkeley. The coalition sued the state after unsuccessfully attempting for years to persuade the agency to shift to a sustainable approach to pest control that protects human health and the environment.Despite thousands of comment letters urging the department to take a safer approach, officials in 2014 approved a program that gave them broad license to spray 79 pesticides, some known to cause <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/cancer" style="text-decoration-line: none;">cancer</a> and birth defects, anywhere in the state, including schools, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/organic" style="text-decoration-line: none;">organic</a> farms, public parks and residential yards.Spraying was allowed indefinitely and required no analysis of the health and environmental impacts of the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chemicals" style="text-decoration-line: none;">chemicals</a> at the specific application sites and no public notice or scrutiny of treatment decisions. Many of the pesticides are also highly toxic to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bees" style="text-decoration-line: none;">bees</a>, butterflies, fish and birds.

This injunction follows a Jan. 8 <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/pesticides_reduction/pdfs/2018-1-8-NCRA-v-CDFA-Consolidated-Ruling.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">ruling</a> by Judge Timothy M. Frawley voiding approval of the agency's statewide program for numerous violations of state environmental laws, including relying on "unsupported assumptions and speculation" to conclude that pesticides would not contaminate <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/water" style="text-decoration-line: none;">water</a> bodies. The ruling also cited the state's "woefully deficient" analysis of the cumulative danger of increasing the more than 150 million pounds of pesticides already being used in California each year.

The court process culminating revealed not only far-reaching flaws in the state's analysis of the environmental harm caused by the department's pesticide use but also the agency's decades-long history of evading disclosure of the human health and environmental impacts of its activities by granting itself repeated "emergency" exemptions from environmental laws.

"After more than 30 years of disregard for state environmental laws, the agency's chemical weapons have finally been taken off the table," said Nan Wishner of the California Environmental Health Initiative. "We hope the department will take this opportunity to shift course and apply sound <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/science/" style="text-decoration-line: none;">science</a>, partner with the public, and develop a more sustainable, transparent approach."

The court also held that the agency had to give public notice of its activities, which officials had insisted was not required.

"The court rejected the agency's blank check to spray people's yards, exposing children and pets to a range of pesticides that can cause serious long-term problems, including cancer, asthma and IQ loss," said Debbie Friedman, founder of <a href="https://www.momsadvocatingsustainability.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">MOMS Advocating Sustainability</a>. "If only the $4.5 million in taxpayer dollars used to develop this outdated program had been spent to develop a modern, sustainable approach that does not rely on toxic chemicals, just imagine what progress we could have made toward a healthier environment for everyone."...</div></div>lamar smith trying to get approved by secret sci ploy? see partic holohttps://www.dcreport.org/2017/11/21/we-dont-need-no-stinking-science/<h4 class="entry-title" style="text-align: left; margin-top: 20px; margin-bottom: 0.5rem; line-height: 1.24; text-transform: capitalize; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">‘We Don’t Need No Stinking Science!’</h4><div class="entry-content" style="margin: 25px 0px;"><h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left; margin-top: 1rem; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; line-height: 1.25; letter-spacing: 0px;">Pesticide Makers Seek to Bar Scientists from Assessing How Their Poisons Affect Endangered Species</h2>By Sarah OkesonEPA Administrator Scott Pruitt <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/us/politics/epa-insecticide-chlorpyrifos.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">overruled his own scientists</a> to prevent an agriculture ban of a DowDuPont pesticide that causes brain damage in children, and now pesticide manufacturers have their sights set on undermining federal protections for endangered animals like the whooping crane.A draft<a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/pesticides_reduction/pdfs/Pesticide_ESA_Secret_Draft_Legislation.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;"> bill</a> being shopped around by the pesticide industry would bar expert wildlife scientists from assessing what harm pesticides can do to about 1,800 endangered species unless the makers of those pesticides ask for their input, according to the <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Center for Biological Diversity</a> and other conservation groups.“If Pruitt <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2017/pesticides-11-16-2017.php" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">won’t protect our children and farmworkers</a> from the overuse of highly poisonous insecticides, then he certainly can’t be trusted to protect our endangered species from them,” said Peter Jenkins, counsel for the<a href="https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;"> Center for Food Safety.</a> “Beautiful species like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0g1jE5HeQE" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Palos Verde Blue butterflies,</a> <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vRMGiToAVg" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">rusty patched bumble bees</a> and even our<a href="https://www.savingcranes.org/whooping-crane-fall-migration-has-begun/" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;"> majestic whooping cranes</a> may all disappear if we are forced to trust Mr. Pruitt—but this bill removes all the checks on him.”<div class="action-box" style="background-color: rgb(219, 229, 241); margin: 2em; padding: 1em; border: 1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0);">ACTION BOX/What You Can Do About ItTell Pruitt your thoughts via his <a href="https://www.facebook.com/EPAScottPruitt/" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/EPAScottPruitt" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Twitter</a> sites. His email is <a href="mailto:Pruitt.scott@Epa.gov" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Pruitt.scott@Epa.gov</a>. His phone number is 202-564-4700.Write him at USEPA Headquarters / William Jefferson Clinton Building / 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW / Mail Code: 1101A / Washington, D.C. 20460.The <a href="https://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Center for Food Safety</a> can be reached at <a href="mailto:office@centerforfoodsafety.org" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">office@centerforfoodsafety.org</a> or at 202-547-9359.</div>Under current law, the Environmental Protection Agency must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to minimize harm to endangered species from pesticides that are approved by the EPA.EPA spokesman Robert Daguillard was unable to provide a response Monday to questions from DCReport.org.DowDuPont has <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dow-pesticides-trump-20170420-story.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">close ties</a> to the Trump administration. Dow Chemical, which <a href="https://www.dow.com/en-us/news/press-releases/dowdupont-merger-successfully-completed" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">merged</a> with DuPont in August, contributed $1 million to help pay for Trump’s inauguration, and DowDuPont  Executive Chairman <a href="https://www.dow.com/en-us/about-dow/our-company/leadership/andrew-n-liveris" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Andrew Liveris</a> led a <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/09/politics/andrew-liveris-dow-chemical-ceo-america-manufacturing-council/index.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">White House manufacturing working group</a> that has been <a href="http://www.freep.com/story/money/business/2017/08/16/trump-economic-councils-charlottesville-barra/573270001/" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">disbanded.</a>A Dow spokesman did not respond Monday to questions from DCReport.org.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-style: initial; border-color: initial; border-image: initial; display: inline; height: auto; margin-top: 0.4em; margin-bottom: 1.6em; margin-left: 1.6em;"><img class="size-medium wp-image-7462 alignright lazyloaded" src="https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-300x221.png" data-lazy-src="https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-300x221.png" alt="" width="300" height="221" data-lazy-srcset="https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-300x221.png 300w, https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-768x566.png 768w, https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015.png 975w" data-lazy-sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" srcset="https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-300x221.png 300w, https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015-768x566.png 768w, https://ui6lfrrydp-flywheel.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/L_CHLORPYRIFOS_2015.png 975w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" style="border: 0px; display: inline; float: right; max-width: 100%; height: auto; margin: 0.4em 0px 1.6em 1.6em;" />In January, just before former President Barack Obama left office, the EPA released its <a href="https://www.pri.org/stories/2017-02-05/three-major-pesticides-are-likely-harm-nearly-all-us-endangered-species" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">first nationwide biological evaluation</a> of three commonly used pesticides–<a href="http://www.factcheck.org/2017/04/the-facts-on-chlorpyrifos/" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">chlorpyrifos,</a> <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/malagen.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">malathion</a> and <a href="http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/Diazgen.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">diazinon.</a> The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-releases-final-biological-evaluations-three-chemicals-impacts-endangered-species" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">report</a> said the three, which are all <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/rmpp_6thed_ch5_organophosphates.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">organophosphates,</a> were harmful to almost all our country’s endangered species, including whooping cranes,<a href="http://www.defenders.org/gray-wolf/basic-facts" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;"> gray wolves,</a> <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/species/invertebrates/Miami_blue_butterfly/" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Miami blue butterflies</a> and <a href="http://us.whales.org/wdc-in-action/facts-about-orcas" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">killer whales.</a>Organophosphates work by targeting the neuronal pathways in insects and pests, much the way that a nerve gas would attack humans. Organophosphates are also harmful to mammals, including humans.In April, lawyers representing Dow Chemical and two other pesticide manufacturers <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/pesticides_reduction/pdfs/Letters_to_Pruitt_Zinke_Ross_from_Dow_Chemical.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">sent letters</a> to Pruitt and the heads of two other Cabinet agencies asking them <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dow-pesticides-trump-20170420-story.html" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">“to set aside”</a> the findings of the government studies which the pesticide companies say are flawed.Commerce Secretary <a href="https://www.dcreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/wilbur-ross-comes-to-d-c-with-a-long-and-profitable-history-of-russian-connections.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Wilbur Ross,</a> who oversees the <a href="https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/welcome" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">National Marine Fisheries Service,</a> and Interior Secretary <a href="https://www.gq.com/story/ryan-zinke-secretary-of-interior-profile" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Ryan Zinke,</a>who oversees the <a href="https://www.fws.gov/" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Fish and Wildlife Service,</a> also received letters. The two other companies were <a href="http://www.fmc.com/" style="text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">FMC Corp.,</a> which sells malathion, and diazinon maker <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/profiles/companies/0193499D:US-makhteshim-agan-of-north-america-inc" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">Makhteshim Agan of North America Inc.</a>, which does business under the name Adama.FMC Corp. said withdrawing the government studies would allow time for the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dow-pesticides-trump-20170420-story.html" style="background-color: transparent; text-decoration-line: none; transition: all 0.3s linear;">“best available”</a> scientific data to be compiled.</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>

===

<h1 class="headline h1" style=" margin: 10px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 31px;">Senators Unveil Bill to Ban Chlorpyrifos</h1>

</div>

Senators Tom Udall (D-NM), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Kamala Harris (D-CA) , Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Edward J. Markey (D-MA) unveiled Tuesday a first-of-its-kind bill that would ban <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chlorpyrifos" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">chlorpyrifos</a>, a widely used agricultural pesticide that has been linked to reduced IQ and attention deficit disorder in children. Chlorpyrifos, an organophosphate which comes from the <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=dT4wYTpGDNAC&pg=PA227&lpg=PA227&dq=chlorpyrifos+sarin+nazi&source=bl&ots=Tg7FxdSV_l&sig=vh5mxcVii7O8L4e73NHWKEkNy8o&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwij8-HZ_vTTAhVHx1QKHVoBAkAQ6AEIVjAI#v=onepage&q=chlorpyrifos%20sarin%20nazi&f=false" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">same chemical family</a> as sarin nerve gas, is used on staple foods like strawberries, apples, citrus, broccoli and more.

The Protect Children, Farmers & Farmworkers from Nerve Agent Pesticides Act amends the U.S. Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, S. 1624, that oversees food safety and prohibits all chlorpyrifos use in food. It also directs the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to partner with the National Research Council to assess the neurodevelopment effects and other low-dose impacts that exposure to organophosphate <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pesticides" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">pesticides</a> has on agricultural workers and children. In addition to calling for a ban on chlorpyrifos, the bill educates the public about the history of this nerve agent pesticide and the communities that are in harms' way.

</div>

"The chemical industry can and must do better than continue to push for the use of nerve agents in our food. This bill comes at a crucial time when scientific integrity and the protection of the public is compromised by industry collusion with the administration," said Andrea Delgado, legislative director of the Healthy Communities program at <a href="http://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Earthjustice</a>. "The most exposed and vulnerable among us are our children, farmworkers and families in rural communities, and they deserve action now."

The bill was unveiled in the presence of more than 30 representatives from health, labor and civil rights organizations from across the country. The delegation met with senators to seek their leadership in banning chlorpyrifos. The group is urging officials to support the bill and protect the health of the millions of workers and children who are exposed to chlorpyrifos every year.

"No family should be facing a life of special needs because of chlorpyrifos," said the delegation in a statement. "If the EPA refuses to protect the health of our children and agricultural workers, then lawmakers from both sides of the aisle must do their job and back the chlorpyrifos ban bill. The health of our communities depends on it."

The bill comes days after a court of appeals <a href="http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/PANNA%20v%20%20EPA%20Order%207-18-17.pdf" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">declined</a> to direct the EPA to act on whether to ban the controversial pesticide.

Chlorpyrifos is linked to long-term damage to children's developing brains and nervous systems even at low levels of exposure during pregnancy and early childhood. It is also acutely toxic.

In March, the EPA <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-03/documents/chlorpyrifos3b_order_denying_panna_and_nrdc27s_petitition_to_revoke_tolerances.pdf" target="blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">refused to ban chlorpyrifos</a> claiming the science is "<a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-03/documents/chlorpyrifos3b_order_denying_panna_and_nrdc27s_petitition_to_revoke_tolerances.pdf" target="blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">unresolved</a>" and decided it would study the issue until 2022. That decision came weeks after the agency boss, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Scott Pruitt</a>, <a href="https://apnews.com/2350d7be5e24469ab445089bf663cdcb" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">met</a> with the head of Dow Chemical, which sells chlorpyrifos under the name of Lorsban. In refusing a ban, the EPA reversed its own proposal to ban all food crop uses of chlorpyrifos. Groups represented by Earthjustice have appealed the EPA decision directly with the agency, however. Attorney generals from various states, too, have called for a ban in their own appeals to the EPA.

...

</div>

===

In  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.

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."

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></div></div></div></div></div>