Op-Ed Articles

Nation Has Right to Know; Needs Right to Know More
April 15, 1997

By Rep. Henry A. Waxman

Issue Forum (Advertising Supplement in the Washington Post)

Ten years ago, Congress passed one of the nation's simplest, but most successful, environmental laws. Known as the right-to-know law, it requires certain industries to publicly report their toxic emissions.

Mandatory public disclosure under the right-to-know law has caused businesses to take a critical look at the toxic chemicals they use, to invent safer alternatives, and to find ways to prevent pollution. Industries covered by the law have decreased their toxic chemical emissions by more than 40 percent since it was passed.

Now is the time for Congress to strengthen and expand the right-to-know law. In the last 10 years, states have shown that new right-to-know initiatives can have big payoffs. We should learn from the states´ experience and apply these programs nationally.

For example, the Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Act expanded the right-to-know principle to include a requirement that industries keep track of the toxic chemicals they use, not just the chemicals they release into the environment. Since this law went into effect in 1990, the amount of toxic chemicals used by Massachusetts industry has dropped by 20 percent, while the volume of chemicals ending up as waste has dropped by 30 percent.

The Massachusetts experience is only the most recent example of the benefits of public disclosure. The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection has been collecting chemical use information from its industries since 1987. In the first seven years of the program, New Jersey industry cut its toxic chemical waste by half.

This is good for a company's bottom line as well as for the public. Reduced use means less money spent on toxic chemicals and reduced waste means lower disposal costs. New Jersey found that for every dollar a company spent on pollution prevention planning, it could save $5 to $8 on its industrial facilities.

While New Jersey and Massachusetts have focused on industrial facilities, California has applied the right-to-know principle to consumer products.

In 1986 the California voters approved Proposition 65, which requires labeling products that expose consumers to toxic chemicals. Prop 65 has achieved notable success in encouraging industry to make safer products. For instance, lead-free china and lead-free faucets have become standard due to Prop 65.

Congress has passed other important right-to-know laws, such as the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act in 1992. The law simply requires that families be warned of potential lead hazards in their homes. The objective is to inform families about the risks of lead poisoning so they can take appropriate steps to reduce their risks.

Similarly in 1996, the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments and the Food Quality Protection Act both included provisions to ensure the public's right to know.

The new Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments will require public water systems to inform their customers about contaminants in their drinking water. This is important to the vulnerable members of our society who may be particularly susceptible to waterborne diseases.

The Food Quality Protection Act will require, for the first time, disclosure in supermarkets of foods containing pesticide residue.

Based on these experiences, we should comprehensively expand the federal right to-know law.

The vast majority of chemicals in the marketplace are untested; we need to create incentives for testing so that the public is not exposed to unknown risks.

The federal right-to-know law should require public disclosure of the same kinds of information required by the most successful state laws. The federal law needs to include facilities that pollute, yet have escaped existing reporting requirements. And it should cover the pollutants posing the most serious threats to our children's health.

I am sponsoring legislation that would turn these goals into reality. My common-sense bill would cost little but would bring significant benefits to nearly every American family.

Now is the time to build on the foundation of historical success and growing bipartisan support. Now is the time for Congress to expand the public's right to know.