By Michael Kaufman

The extent to which corporate polluters of the environment influence government policy in this country was dramatically illustrated last week at a Congressional hearing that received scant media attention. Republicans who control the House Small Business subcommittee, as well as the peculiarly named House Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, took aim at the latest “Report on Carcinogens” issued by the National Institute of Environmental and Health Sciences (NIEH), a division of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

“This is an out-front attack on the ROC and the NIEHS,” lamented environmental activist Lin Kaatz Chary, PhD, MPH, of Indiana Toxics Action. “It represents a continuation by Republicans of the Bush Administration’s efforts to undermine science.” Chary noted that the list of witnesses at the hearing was dominated by representatives of the chemical industry, who joined Republicans in an attempt to discredit NIEHS director Linda Birnbaum.

“Linda Birnbaum is probably the best NIEHS director that agency has ever had,” says Chary. “She is a brilliant scientist and has been an advocate for recognizing the health impacts of exposures to many hazardous chemicals.” Birnbaum, she noted, led the review of dioxin that began in the 1980s but was only recently released because of obstructive opposition from industry.

Paul Broun (R-Ga.), chairman of the “Oversight” committee, complained that the listings in the latest report could have a negative effect on commerce and small business “with no appreciable benefit” to the safety of the public. Charles Maresca, testifying on behalf of  the Small Business Administration, chimed in, saying “substances have been listed in the [report] based on inaccurate scientific information.”

Birnbaum defended the report, reminding her inquisitors that it was mandated by Congress to help people avoid potentially hazardous substances. “We have both a legal and a moral obligation to identify substances that are cancer hazards,” she said.

Brad Miller (D-N.C.) defended Birnbaum, beginning with an anecdote from his days as a student studying abroad in London. After a long search for a pickup basketball game, he finally found one. But most of the players were professionals playing in Europe.  “It became clear I was out of my depth,” Miller told Maresca. “That is probably how you should feel sitting next to Dr. Birnbaum talking about the subject before us.”

Miller pointed out that Maresca is not a scientist, and there are no scientists at the SBA charged with the responsibility of protecting public health. He and other Democrats charged that Republicans called the hearing at the behest of the styrene industry. That industry has spent $1 million on lobbying on the issue over the past two years and took credit for the hearing in a recent newsletter.

“We are really examining the objections of one industry to the listing of one chemical,” said Paul Tonko (D-NY) the “Science” subpanel’s ranking member. Tonko, who represents the 19^th district, including Albany, Schenectady, Montgomery and several other counties, termed the hearing “very disappointing.”

The chemical industry has aggressively challenged the cancer report’s conclusions. The Styrene Information and Research Center, an industry group, has a lawsuit pending against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), claiming the report “lacks transparency.” And the American Chemistry Council issued a statement accusing the report of falling “well short of meeting the benchmarks of objectivity, scientific accuracy and transparency…”

But environmental and public health advocates have a different view. “The attempt of the chemical industry and House Republicans to ‘ Swift Boat’ the Report on Carcinogens ran into a brick wall of facts and truth at today’s hearing,” said Daniel Rosenberg of the Natural Resources Defense Council.  Unfortunately, few people noticed because of the lack of coverage.

Meanwhile, as part of the $1 trillion omnibus spending package passed last year, Republicans succeeded in pushing through authorization of $1 million for the HHS to contract a National Academy of Sciences review of the styrene and formaldehyde listings. “I realize that $1 million out of a trillion is a very small amount relatively speaking,” says Chary. “But the fact that Congress would spend even a dime on this ‘review,’ while cutting back severely on so many programs that truly protect the health of  the American people is outrageous.” Nowadays, she says, “the chemical industry clearly considers itself part of the government.”

Michael can be reached at michael@zestoforange.com.