Beating Around the Bush
Since the last installment of
Beating Around the Bush, George W. Bush
has furthered his reputation as the
worst environmental president in history
with three new assaults on public safety and the environment:
1. Pesticide Spraying Over Lakes and Streams Now Fine
Currently, the Clean Water Act requires permitting whenever anyone wants to add a pollutant to a waterway. On February 1 the Bush Administration proposed a new rule to allow the spraying of toxic pesticides “to or over, including near” a waterbody without a permit, as long as the chemicals are applied in accordance with their labeling instructions. This change is devastating because these chemicals were not designed for application to water. Most of these chemicals are toxic to aquatic plants and animals, causing massive fish kills and poisoning drinking water. With the removal of Clean Water Act safeguards our communities and waterways will be increasing subject to these dangerous contaminants.

2. Selenium No Longer Dangerous
The Bush Administration has proposed a new standard for the heavy metal selenium. Selenium is a toxin that is known to cause severe reproductive impairment in fish, birds, and other wildlife. Selenium pollution is released into the environment by coal, phosphate, uranium and other mineral mining operations, by coal-fired power plants, and oil refineries. Selenium is also often a significant component of commercial fertilizers.
Bush’s proposal will eliminate the existing water quality criteria for selenium and replace it with one developed with faulty science. Several scientific experts on selenium have already commented that EPA’s method is not scientifically justified. The change will leave many fish species in significant jeopardy, and allow industries to increase discharges of selenium above current levels.

3. Harvard Economists Squashed
The Administration has a proven track record of withholding information that undercuts their refusal to implement the simple solutions to mercury contamination of our waterways. U.S. EPA could drastically reduce mercury pollution by ordering the nation’s coal-burning power plants to install available and technologically savvy pollution controls.
Instead, the Administration has ignored the inconvenient findings of a cost/benefit economics study that U.S. EPA commissioned. The study, released in February by the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis, identified $5 billion a year in public health benefits if EPA imposed stricter rules for controlling emissions containing mercury by reducing neurological and heart disease. Though EPA commissioned the research and reviewed the results, the findings were excluded from consideration in the new rule EPA released in March. To justify that step, EPA claims the study was submitted after deadline (although evidence has been found to the contrary.) In another example of EPA selectively ignoring the science, an ignored internal EPA report estimated that the Southeast alone could reap up to $2 billion a year in benefits from reducing mercury pollution, far greater than the $50 million in benefits the agency projected publicly for the entire nation.