As contention over President-elect George W. Bush's nominations for
Labor and Justice grabs the headlines, it is important that Gale Norton's
nomination for secretary of the Interior not fly under the radar.
Norton's role as a lobbyist for NL Industries, previously known as
National Lead Co., is a terrifying harbinger of what may befall the
nation if the Senate confirms her.
National Lead is responsible for what is perhaps the nation's most
devastating children's health crisis. For decades, National Lead promoted
and distributed millions of gallons of lead-based paint under its "Dutch
Boy" brand name. Lead paint has led to the death and brain damage of
thousands of children.
That Norton lobbied for a company that pushed for toxic lead paint to
the point where it covers the walls of a major portion of our housing
stock, particularly in urban areas and older suburbs, at best indicates
an extraordinary ignorance of the corporate cultures within which she
works. At worst, it shows a dangerous bias for the worst polluters of the
American environment.
National Lead's irresponsible corporate culture is not something that
Norton could have missed, for it extends deep into the history of the
company. By the mid-1920s, numerous cases of lead paint intoxication
among infants and toddlers, resulting in severe brain damage and even
death, were documented in the medical literature.
Despite this, NL Industries worked hard to popularize the use of lead
paint through a direct marketing campaign aimed at young children.
Through the use of its Dutch Boy logo, the nation was, for decades,
lulled into a false sense of security about the safety of lead paint on
walls, woodwork and window sills with which children constantly came in
contact.
National Lead began a campaign that sought to, in the words of one of
its early marketing ads, "cater to the children." In thousands of ads,
brochures and visits to schools, 4-H Clubs and hospitals, the company
joined with its trade association, the Lead Industries Assn., to
counteract negative publicity. Most pernicious were the children's paint
books distributed free to children. Children were encouraged to read the
poems that accompanied the illustrations of the Dutch Boy riding on bars
of lead, playing with lead soldiers, mixing white lead with colors, and
painting children's toys, furniture and bedroom walls.
In the 1930s and 1940s as well, the company spent hundreds of
thousands of dollars in advertising, promotion and lobbying efforts to
make sure that "pure white lead" was insulated from the growing chorus of
voices calling for its elimination from the interior of houses. National
Lead encouraged teachers and parents to "get after the school trustees to
have each room repainted" with "flat paint made of Dutch Boy white-lead
and flatting oil." In another more poignant promotion, Dutch Boy shows a
crawling infant touching a painted wall: "There is no cause for worry
when fingerprint smudges or dirt spots appear on a wall painted with
Dutch Boy white-lead," the ad reassures parents.
The Dutch Boy Painter, a periodical published by National Lead,
carried an article during the Depression on using lead paint to stencil
"humorous designs such as cartoons, caricatures and pictorials in
recreation rooms, game rooms, bars, etc. . . . for use in nurseries,
kindergartens, play rooms and other places where children gather."
Throughout its history, National Lead proudly bragged of the success
of its marketing campaign to children. This marketing of the Dutch Boy
image was an essential element of National Lead's profitability and the
rise of its sales from $80 million in 1939 to more than $320 million in
1948.
National Lead and its trade association, the LIA, encouraged shifting
responsibility for this tragedy from lead paint to the parents and
children themselves. They shaped the research agendas of scientists and
intimidated researchers who identified lead paint as the source of
children's learning disorders.
When medical and public opinion were so great that it could not deny
the link between lead paint and childhood lead poisoning, the LIA
promoted the idea that poisoned children suffered from a preexisting
condition called pica--a "morbid craving" for lead paint chips. Similarly
it argued that parents living in slum dwellings were responsible for not
properly supervising their children and not maintaining clean homes.
For many decades to come, we will continue to see thousands of
children entering our emergency rooms with the symptoms of lead
poisoning. If Norton is ignorant of this company's seedy history, then it
is frightening indeed that she might be in charge of overseeing the use
of our nation's mineral resources and public lands and protecting the
public from other irresponsible industries intent on exploiting the world
we live in for their own profit.
David Rosner Is a Professor of History and Public Health at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. Gerald Markowitz Is a Professor of History at John Jay College and City University of New York's Graduate Center
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
###