Oh Mercury, Where Art Thou? (in your kid)

EPA rule written to suit industry, staff says

This article was originally published in the Los Angeles Times. It's about the Bush administration's approach to managing mercury emissions through the Clear Skies Act. In a previous post, I asserted that the Republicans in charge of our country are not conservatives. They are Ideologues, reactionaries really, much more interested in reaching their policy goals than in you or I, or our kids. They use the friendliest possible language to describe their policy initiatives while the impact of the legislation is often ruinous.

Let's take mercury as an example. Mercury is bad for you. It's one of the most toxic substances to humans that we know about. It's bad for fish and animals, too. It's especially bad for kids, because, according to the EPA, "Impacts on memory, attention, language and other skills have been found in children exposed to moderate levels in the womb." According to the LA Times, "In 2000, a National Research Council study commissioned by Congress estimated that each year about 60,000 children born in the United States could have neurological problems because they were exposed to mercury before birth. Exposure could lead to developmental problems."

Now, mercury is also useful. It's used in the auto industry, in healthcare, and it is a by-product of coal burning power plants. It has been in use for a long time. In fact, we started using mercury before we really knew it was bad for us. As a conservative and a businessman, I understand business implications and cost of removing mercury from our manufacturing, healthcare, and energy delivery systems. It isn't possible to just outright ban it. The business problem is too large. However, as a progressive, I understand that we have to remove it. Why? Because as a father I am horrified at the thought of one of my precious children, or anybody else's for that matter, sacrificing even one brain cell to the almighty dollar. I mean, let's get our priorities straight, shall we?

You would think the president of the United States, who is also a father, would view things similarly.

You would be wrong. President Bush and his administration are ideologues. He is neither compassionate nor conservative. With this crowd, you have to watch what they do, not what they say.

From the article:

"The EPA staffers say they were told not to undertake the normal scientific and economic studies called for under a standing executive order. At the same time, the proposal to regulate mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants was written using key language provided by utility lobbyists."

You see, the energy industry has donated upwards of $40 million dollars to Republican candidates since 1999, and $6 million to the Bush campaign directly. That money bought Energy Industry the right to author this nation's energy policy. They met in secret, lead by the Ideologue-in-Hiding, Dick Cheney, and came up with the Clear Skies Act. This legislation allows mercury polluters, typically coal burning power plants, to buy polluting "credits" from non-polluters, allowing them to continue spewing mercury into the air. Since mercury is heavy, it will concentrate in vastly higher amounts around the plants.

What will the result be? The people who live around those plants will be exposed to much higher levels of mercury than are known to be safe.

This is not a partisan issue. It's a human issue. See-- for President Bush, it isn't about you and me and our kids, it's about business. And because he believes that, he ignores the facts. And that means that somebody's kid - maybe yours - might not get to be everything they could have been.

That's what happens when you have a president that cares more about his ideas than he does about the well being of the people he leads.