

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
The leading trade organization and lobbyist for the chemical industry left its computerized fingerprints all over a chemical safety reform bill being debated this week in Congress, according to "rudimentary digital forensics" performed by Hearst News Service.
The findings, revealed the day before Wednesday's Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee hearing on the legislation, support environmental and public health advocates' claim that the bill is backed by the very industry it is meant to regulate.
"In recent days, a draft of the bill--considered the product of more than two years of negotiation and collaboration between Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), and both chemical industry and environmental groups--was circulated by Udall's office ahead of the hearing," writes Hearst Washington bureau chief David McCumber. "The draft bill, obtained by Hearst Newspapers, is in the form of a Microsoft Word document. Rudimentary digital forensics--going to 'advanced properties' in Word--shows the 'company' of origin to be the American Chemistry Council."
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who has introduced a competing bill that is favored by health, environmental, and consumer advocates, criticized what she perceived as industry influence over policy-making.
"It was clear from the computer coding that the final draft originated at the American Chemical Council itself," she said on Tuesday, having seen a copy of the document. "Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I do not believe that a regulated industry should be so intimately involved in writing a bill that regulates them."
And Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook, who was scheduled to testify against the Vitter-Udall bill at Wednesday's hearing, added: "We're apparently at the point in the minds of some people in the Congress that laws intended to regulate polluters are now written by the polluters themselves."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The leading trade organization and lobbyist for the chemical industry left its computerized fingerprints all over a chemical safety reform bill being debated this week in Congress, according to "rudimentary digital forensics" performed by Hearst News Service.
The findings, revealed the day before Wednesday's Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee hearing on the legislation, support environmental and public health advocates' claim that the bill is backed by the very industry it is meant to regulate.
"In recent days, a draft of the bill--considered the product of more than two years of negotiation and collaboration between Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), and both chemical industry and environmental groups--was circulated by Udall's office ahead of the hearing," writes Hearst Washington bureau chief David McCumber. "The draft bill, obtained by Hearst Newspapers, is in the form of a Microsoft Word document. Rudimentary digital forensics--going to 'advanced properties' in Word--shows the 'company' of origin to be the American Chemistry Council."
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who has introduced a competing bill that is favored by health, environmental, and consumer advocates, criticized what she perceived as industry influence over policy-making.
"It was clear from the computer coding that the final draft originated at the American Chemical Council itself," she said on Tuesday, having seen a copy of the document. "Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I do not believe that a regulated industry should be so intimately involved in writing a bill that regulates them."
And Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook, who was scheduled to testify against the Vitter-Udall bill at Wednesday's hearing, added: "We're apparently at the point in the minds of some people in the Congress that laws intended to regulate polluters are now written by the polluters themselves."
The leading trade organization and lobbyist for the chemical industry left its computerized fingerprints all over a chemical safety reform bill being debated this week in Congress, according to "rudimentary digital forensics" performed by Hearst News Service.
The findings, revealed the day before Wednesday's Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee hearing on the legislation, support environmental and public health advocates' claim that the bill is backed by the very industry it is meant to regulate.
"In recent days, a draft of the bill--considered the product of more than two years of negotiation and collaboration between Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) and Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), and both chemical industry and environmental groups--was circulated by Udall's office ahead of the hearing," writes Hearst Washington bureau chief David McCumber. "The draft bill, obtained by Hearst Newspapers, is in the form of a Microsoft Word document. Rudimentary digital forensics--going to 'advanced properties' in Word--shows the 'company' of origin to be the American Chemistry Council."
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who has introduced a competing bill that is favored by health, environmental, and consumer advocates, criticized what she perceived as industry influence over policy-making.
"It was clear from the computer coding that the final draft originated at the American Chemical Council itself," she said on Tuesday, having seen a copy of the document. "Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I do not believe that a regulated industry should be so intimately involved in writing a bill that regulates them."
And Environmental Working Group president Ken Cook, who was scheduled to testify against the Vitter-Udall bill at Wednesday's hearing, added: "We're apparently at the point in the minds of some people in the Congress that laws intended to regulate polluters are now written by the polluters themselves."