Last week marked the culmination of a multi-year, bipartisan, bicameral effort to reform dated legislation that affects American consumers, manufacturers, and the environment on a daily basis. After a number of hearings at the Energy and Commerce Committee and strong votes in the House and Senate, the final product, which was signed into law on June 22, is something everyone can be proud of.
In a Medium post today, full committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) shared the story of how the dream of late Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), along with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, became a reality. “There were folks who said it couldn’t be done, especially with Republicans in Congress and a Democratic president, said Upton. “But we took the time, did the hard work, put in countless hours of discussions and negotiations, and it paid off."
Learn more about the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act HERE.
1976: The Last Time Our Chemical Safety Laws Were Updated
Congress just stepped up to the plate and changed that.
By Chairman Fred Upton
June 22, 2016, marked a milestone. A milestone for this Congress. A milestone for our country. And a milestone for the American people as we made great strides to update our nation’s chemical safety laws.
Updating our chemical safety laws was a multi-year effort that dates back to last Congress. There were folks who said it couldn’t be done, especially with Republicans in Congress and a Democratic president. But we took the time, did the hard work, put in countless hours of discussions and negotiations, and it paid off.
Our legislation will have monumental positive impacts for commerce, the environment, and public health.
Some history: In 1976, under the leadership of Michigan’s own President Jerry Ford, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was a novel approach to regulating interstate commercial activity to address unreasonable risks presented by a chemical. It was not meant to examine all chemical manufacturing and use, but rather provide a backstop of protection when suspicions about dangerous chemicals were not being addressed.
In the nearly four decades since TSCA’s enactment, there have been persistent concerns about the pace of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) work on chemicals, the ability of the agency to meaningfully use its existing authority, and whether the statute prevents certain regulatory efforts. Over the last three years, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, of which I serve as chairman, has conducted nine hearings on all aspects of TSCA. We learned that there is public confusion about chemical-specific safety claims. We also learned that people think EPA should clear up that confusion and be more diligent on risky chemicals. Finally, we learned that companies and workers were disadvantaged in a domestic and global marketplace where conflicting regulatory standards hamper trade.
Within the last decade, a variety of factors - including EPA’s slow pace in regulating chemicals already on the market - have led to several new state chemical control statutes. Some states have passed laws ranging from specific chemical restrictions, to general chemical labeling requirements, like Proposition 65 in California. Meanwhile, some retailers have called out for objective scientific assessment of chemicals in consumer products.
Over a year ago our Energy and Commerce Committee unanimously reported H.R. 2576 and the House passed it 398 to 1. In December, the Senate approved a package of TSCA reforms. The Senate’s bill was quite different from the House bill but this compromise agreement includes many of those Senate policy details. …
This law is good for jobs. It’s good for consumers. And it’s good for the environment. The most meaningful and impactful update to issues involving environment and the economy that we’ve had in decades.
It represents a legislative achievement we can all be proud of.
Read the full column online HERE.
