M8.5 Blog about an ideal chemical policy

It essential for an ideal chemical policy to:

1.    Immediately reduce harm. 

2.    Have a replacement (safe) chemical, 

3.    Have strict enforcement policies

As a public health professional, I unfortunately know policies take a while to be passed. In the meantime communities, workers, and the environment suffers. There are current laws in place to protect the public that do work, but if they are not strictly adhered to, canceled, or overlooked they are essentially useless. These laws are in the hands of powers in office. Under the Obama Administration, the deep-water horizon oil spill in 2010 by BP was a major environmental disaster dumping 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico due to negligence. The Department of Justice fined them 20.8 billion dollars to cover damages and plead to 11 felony counts because 11 people died in the accident. In contrast, under the Trump administration the Obama era clean water regulations were repealed, eliminations of restrictions on fossil fuel pollution including coal-fired power plants, automobile tailpipes and methane emissions, also asbestos and chemical hazards like pesticides. An immediate effect of the clean water repeal is that polluters will no longer need a permit to discharge potentially harmful substances into many streams and wetlands. The current leader thinks industries should be able to run their businesses however they want. The EPA is enforcing these new rule cancelations because of a conflict of interest. About a third of these EPA appointees – including the current acting administrator – formerly worked as registered lobbyists or lawyers for fossil fuel companies, chemical manufacturers, or other corporate clients. It is hard as a public health professional to do their jobs when these companies run the agencies that are creating the guidelines and laws. That is why strict enforcement policies has to come at the state and local level.