|
| ||
|
||
|
|
Congressional delegation slow to respond to mercury threatA look at where Maine's U.S. senators and representatives stand on whether a controversial Environmental Protection Agency report on mercury should be released to Congress
Staff Writer ©Copyright 1997 Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.
Maine's four delegates to Congress have done little to get the federal government to address the growing threat of mercury pollution. When resolutions were introduced in Congress in May, pushing to release a long-delayed mercury study written by the Environmental Protection Agency, none of Maine's delegates supported the measures. In fact, Sen. Olympia Snowe urged the EPA last year to withhold the report which, if released, could bring about new limits on mercury pollution. Snowe said she was opposed only to a section in the report that could have hurt Maine's seafood industry. Maine's three other delegates sat on the sidelines during the EPA debate. The EPA's findings have been controversial because they identify coal-fired power plants as a major mercury source, and also focus attention on fish-consumption warnings for mercury issued in 35 states. The electrical power and commercial fishing industries, fearing lost profits, have used congressional allies to keep the EPA report - and its solutions for cutting mercury in the environment - on the shelf. Until the agency transmits its work to Congress, the EPA cannot begin to adopt tougher rules on mercury emissions from industry. Sen. Patrick Leahy, a Democrat whose home state of Vermont suffers from mercury pollution as Maine does, has led efforts to get the EPA report released. Leahy has urged both President Clinton and EPA Administrator Carol Browner to submit the mercury report to Congress. In May, Leahy introduced a resolution to that effect on the Senate floor. At the same time, a similar resolution was introduced in the House by another member of the Vermont delegation, Rep. Bernard Sanders, an independent. Staff members for Leahy and Sanders said Maine's senators and representatives were told of the resolutions several times, and were invited to be co-sponsors. But Leahy and Sanders got no help from Maine. Snowe, a Republican, was one of 12 senators who urged the EPA in March 1996 to delay major sections of the report because of its potential impact on commercial fisheries. Snowe heads the Fisheries and Oceans Subcommittee of the Senate Commerce Committee. In a written statement last week, Snowe explained that she was troubled by provisions in the EPA report that could hurt Maine's commercial fishing industry, which landed fish worth $248 million in 1996. She noted that two federal agencies that regulate seafood and commercial fishing, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Marine Fisheries Service, also disputed the EPA's findings on seafood. ''Before you can solve a problem, you need to know what the problem is, and the seafood sections at that time were scientifically insufficient to define the scope and character of any problems, much less give us good ideas about how to solve them,'' Snowe said. The EPA report has been rewritten. It lists average mercury contamination levels in common types of seafood and concludes the average consumer is not at risk from commercial fish. Snowe said she is concerned about mercury contamination in Maine and now supports the release of the entire EPA report to the public. She has not, however, signed on to Leahy's resolution. Maine's three other delegates - Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican, and Reps. Thomas Allen and John Baldacci, both Democrats - said they were unaware of the resolutions. ''I don't know how it didn't get to us,'' said Allen, who called for a ban on mercury in batteries during his 1996 congressional campaign. Collins said in a written statement that she was perplexed by the EPA's failure to release the report and was talking closely with officials at the Maine Department of Environmental Protection. ''We will continue to work with the DEP on this issue,'' Collins said. The commissioner of the DEP, Edward O. Sullivan, said his department had asked the delegation to help secure the release of the EPA report. Asked for his opinion of the delegation's work, Sullivan said: ''Actually, I'm not aware of what level of involvement they've had.'' Gov. Angus King has endorsed a resolution with other New England governors calling for action on mercury. King said Sullivan is in charge of the state's effort to get the EPA report released. Allen and Baldacci both said they would sign the resolution to get the EPA's mercury report released. As was the case with Snowe, both Allen's and Baldacci's statements came after they, or their staff members, were contacted by The Portland Newspapers. In his October 1996 letter to Browner, Leahy questioned the EPA's decision to hold onto its mercury findings until new health studies were finished. That decision to do more studies, Leahy wrote, could delay release of the EPA report until next year at least. ''During this time, the threats to public health and the environment will be unabated,'' Leahy wrote. Leahy's letter to Browner was signed by 21 other senators and supported by numerous environmental and public health groups, including the American Lung Association and the National Wildlife Federation. A similar letter was introduced at the same time in the House. There, the effort was led by Rep. Frank Pallone, a New Jersey Democrat. Twenty-four other representatives supported Pallone. In May of this year, Leahy went on the offensive about the mercury pollution effort again, introducing the Senate resolution and writing a letter to President Clinton. In the letter to Clinton, also signed by Sen. James Jeffords, a Vermont Republican, Leahy wrote that states currently are writing energy and solid-waste policies that could set pollution-control measures around the United States for decades to come. The states are doing so, Leahy said, without the benefit of the EPA's mercury report and its guidelines for the future. ''No citizen or senator can dispute the need for good science,'' Leahy's letter said, referring to the EPA's decision to look at the matter some more. ''But the evidence suggests that this report is being delayed because it is good science.'' The EPA's latest position is that it will submit its mercury findings to Congress by the end of the year. WHERE THEY STAND
|
|
Original content in this site by Lori Haugen, graphics by Kathy Jungjohann, Guy Gannett
New Media. Questions or comments? E-mail us.
|
|
What mercury can do to you | One polluter's story HOME | Related links | To comment on this series © Blethen Maine Newspapers Inc.
|