AHT, a coalition of over 160 groups around the state including such mainstream organizations as the League of Women Voters, the Massachusetts Public Health Association, and the Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, has proposed several pieces of legislation, one of which, the Mercury Products bill, became law in 2006. For the last couple of years AHT’s legislative priority has been An Act for a Healthy Massachusetts – Safer Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals.
This bill creates a comprehensive program to replace toxic chemicals in consumer products and industrial processes with safer alternatives when feasible alternatives are available. The bill has provisions to help industry find and make the replacements. It does not ban any chemicals outright, but provides a flexible approach which is actually quite friendly to business.
In 2007, through the grassroots activism of the broad-based AHT coalition, a majority of both houses of the state legislature signed on as co-sponsors of the Safer Alternatives to Toxic Chemicals bill.
At a hearing for the bill in June, a representative of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO testified
We owe those who work in our state the safest and healthiest workplaces we can possibly provide. Where safer alternatives exist, there is no excuse for putting the health and welfare of workers at risk by making them work with completely avoidable toxic chemicals. This legislation takes the necessary step of protecting our workers, with the added benefit of creating jobs in green chemistry and other innovative industries that will lead to new, safe alternatives to toxic chemicals. In fact, in addition to helping us protect the quality of life of our workers, this legislation will help our Commonwealth catch up with many nations around the globe and open up expanded trading relationships with countries that demand products with these kinds of safer chemicals.
But the Patrick administration never came out and supported it, despite thousands of postcards, calls, and letters asking that they do so.
In November of 2007, the State Senate was about to vote on the bill, and would have passed it overwhelmingly, when Senator Tarr, one of the five senate Republicans, asked to delay the bill. At the next session Senator Tisei, the minority leader, again delayed the bill, this time until January. That kind of carrying water on behalf of business interests is what I expect from Republicans. But then, when the bill was about to come to the floor in January, we learned that the administration itself had asked to delay it! It appears that industry groups had asked the administration to do this, and some agencies in the administration had their own concerns about the bill. But earlier last fall, representatives of the administration refused to talk directly with representatives of AHT about potential solutions to their reservations about the bill. During all these delays, industry opposition has increased pressure on State Senators, putting this important legislation at risk.
So I am left wondering, what happened to the support for the public good and for grassroots democracy so eloquently voiced by Deval Patrick during “our campaign?” What is the message to the thousands of citizens who “checked back in,” when moneyed industry groups are heard more loudly and clearly than thousands of us who are asking to protect our public health?
Like many of you, I knocked on doors in searing heat and in rain; I made scores of phone calls to friends and neighbors, laying my credibility on the line asserting that this campaign was for a new vision of government, one where our voices mattered. I am feeling more than a little burned.
But the opportunity is still there for Governor Patrick to support a strong bill that protects public health.
I want to say to our Governor: your message resonated with us, and we yearned to believe in it. We still do! This is another area where your vision can become reality, where, just like you have said about renewable energy, the world will be our customer if we get it right. Come back to us, meet with us, work with us on this. Do you still believe in “together we can?”
Disclosure: I have been a member of the board of Clean Water Action since the spring of 2006, elected shortly after Clean Water Action endorsed Deval Patrick for Governor.
I noticed this legislation moving, then stalling.
<
p>I really don’t know much about it, though I now think I should. Could you post a few educational links?
I had to leave out some links in the original post because I was getting a strange error message when I tried to embed them. Here is a link to a post I wrote on Truth&Progress before the bill’s hearing in June. It contains links to some really helpful information in it: http://www.truthandprogress.co…
<
p>Then here’s the updated version of the bill itself:
http://www.mass.gov/legis/bill…
<
p>Hope this helps. If this isn’t what you are looking for, please let me know and I will try to get it for you.
to his proposal to cut corporate taxes, legalize casinos and a whole host of other things…
<
p>You’re not alone in being profoundly disappointed by this Governor.
Almost everything this Governor campaigned on requires investment – fixing the infrastructure, improving education, reducing property taxes, attracting new businesses, fostering long-term economic growth.
<
p>The Governor’s first proposals – local options taxes and closing corporate tax loopholes – were bottled up by the legislature. What did you do to change that? Did you personally lobby your representatives? Did you organize others to lobby?
<
p>Casinos are just another funding avenue. Don’t like it? – then help the legislature get the message that it needs to provide other options.
<
p>The progressive community is behaving childishly. The Governor can’t make good things happen by magic. We actually have to unite behind some initiatives and really push for them, like we did for marriage equality, to be successful.
<
p>The Governor’s a smart and well-intentioned guy. Instead of playing patsy for the Republican smear machine, you should be out there supporting him on the things on which you do agree. You aren’t going to get someone better in the office.
<
p>Yes. And Yes.
<
p>Go read my blog. I’m STILL pushing those issues.
<
p>
<
p>Which is why, if you cared to look back at my previous diaries on the site, I HAVE been organizing and lobbying the legislature. I’m working closely with CasinoFreeMass, in fact, and we’ve done great work so far, though there’s much more to do.
<
p>
<
p>And casinos is the one you want to unite behind? Progressives WERE united behind the Municipal Partnership Act. The Governor didn’t have the cajones to take advantage of that. We could have gone to the mattresses, Governor Patrick decided to unleash upon this state about 50 million new proposals, almost none of which would ever pass – and many of them were anathema to what it means to be a progressive.
<
p>
<
p>And I’m doing that. But I am not going to let this governor, for one second, off the hook for promoting terrible policy for this state. I’ve done the research on the casino issue, almost as much as humanly possible given the data that there’s available. I’ve unearthed stories. I’ve investing time. Governor Patrick is MY governor, it doesn’t work the other way around. We got him in office and we’re the only reason why he’ll either stay or go, after his term is up. I’m not trying to be a part of the Republican spin machine, but the Governor is trying his best to promote Republican party policy every day in office since around September.
http://www.competeamerica.org/…
<
p>Can you say “gateway to servitude” …
Such a Sport ..
How many of the alleged 20,000 casino jobs will go to non-US residents? non-MA residents? non-taxable individuals? Looking at models from other states where casinos recruit foreign students/workers to live in dorms (room and board) we should have a honest conversation, not politics as usual with monied interests ruling the day.
How many of the alleged 30,000 construction jobs will go to non-US residents? non-MA residents? Construction is transient by nature and the return to the MA economy is a net loss. My position is not anti-immigration or anti-migrant, it is tell the truth about policies that are a loss for the working middle class.
Your vision is focused on the crumb on the dock while the cruise ship speeds by. Someday you may find yourself begging for the opportunity to mop the floor in that casino if you dont refocus your vision onto the huge wave from the ships wake that is about to crash over you and that crumb.
The casino industry is the tsunami of policies that have eroded economies of and for the public good. My choice to focus on the issue that the Governor has flung into the fray is deeply rooted in policy. I have mopped floors before and would again. As a working class taxpaying resident who is deeply concerned about the fabric of society, I have a voice in this matter that does matter.
<
p>The cruise ship of capitalism has slammed the harbor. We don’t need to build more destructive policies. But, hey, thanks for the warning. Maybe I’ll re-think this whole social/economic justice work and just take a cruise. Brillant alternative.
is important, but it really isn’t what this thread was supposed to be about. Would you take it to a different thread? Thank you.
Margot, I apologize for my part in turning the yarn on the thread in a different direction than you intended for your very important topic.
<
p>May connect a few dots with the issues that you are concerned with in the spirit that it may be helpful for your coalition (the Governor and Legislature) to understand the environmental/water impacts of casinos?
<
p> MEPA
does not appear to be triggered in the casino proposal until after votes, applications and licenses are granted. Should this not be a major concern to all of us? Should the environmental studies not be conducted prior to licensing? Or licenses granted provisionally upon MEPA completion and full public review? What happens if MEPA discovery reveals that it is imprudent to proceed in a proposed site? Will the town/city/state be sued?
<
p>Meanwhile, a public education campaign on toxins (I was teaching students in the 90’s about dioxin (bleach) and cancer) is long past due. Implementing stronger health curriculum on these issues in public education is doable. I hope this bridges the connection to the issues you present in the opening subject. I will send letters to my legislators.
Stalling the Safe Alternatives bill fits a pattern of excessive deference to the big interests, whether it is the corporations or the large universities. The state overrode the concerns of environmentalists and the community on the Harvard Science Center and allowed Harvard to waive a full environmental review which could have pushed for stronger public transit improvement and better storm water management practices.