Senate seeks plastic additive ban
Toolbox
By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press Bureau - Published: April 3, 2010
MONTPELIER – Senate lawmakers took a bold step Friday toward banning the use of a potentially dangerous chemical in many plastic containers, including baby formula packages, sippy cups and water bottles.
Senators voted 25-1 to begin banning the use of Bisphenol A in reusable water bottles starting in the spring of 2012, and its use in packaging for items such as liquid infant formula and baby food in spring 2014.
The proposed new law – which still needs to be approved by the Vermont House – is modeled after a recent law passed in Connecticut. Several states prohibit the use of BPA in some plastic items, such as baby bottles, but Vermont's proposal would go much farther than those laws.
"Vermont could become the second state in the country to aggressively ban the use of BPA," said Charity Carbine, the environmental health advocate for the Vermont Public Interest Research Group. "This is a victory for Vermont. In the fight between kids and chemicals, kids won today."
The Environmental Protection Agency and the Food and Drug Administration both launched investigations into the dangers of BPA earlier this year. The chemical is commonly used in the creation of plastics and has been linked to cancer and developmental problems in children. Concerns have also been raised about its common use in sports water bottles.
Still, it wasn't an easy battle to pass a BPA ban in the Senate. Most senators agreed that the chemical was definitely dangerous to infants and young children and likely dangerous for adults too. But several key Democratic leaders worried that the Senate was moving too fast in these bans before alternatives were available on the market.
Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was the only senator in the room during the final vote to not support the ban. He offered an amendment earlier that morning that would have implemented part of the ban earlier while studying the possibility of further bans.
The amendment failed in a vote of 16-12.
"This has been characterized as weakening the bill," Sears said. "I just don't see it."
But Sen. Ann Cummings, D-Washington, said Sears' amendment would essentially gut the bill, putting into law what the industry is already doing voluntarily. She said aware parents have already avoided buying baby bottles with BPA and those products are now hard to find on the shelf.
"We would essentially be making illegal something that isn't even there," she said.
Sen. Mark McDonald, D-Orange, noted that when people look back at governments banning chemicals such as synthetic pesticide DDT (which the U.S. government banned in 1972), people "always wonder what took them so long."
"History has shown that this is the right thing to do," he said.
Sen. Dick McCormack, D-Windsor, suggested that lawmakers should go even farther to ban the use of BPA in all plastics that could contain food and water. He said the discussion gets caught up in political debates over "the left and the right" and lawmakers forget that "we are talking about stuff that gives you cancer."
"We're focusing on children here, as we probably should," he said. "But I have innards too and would like to keep them where they are."
Sears made it clear that he also thinks BPA is dangerous, saying "BPA is probably not a good thing." He noted that the chemical is contained in coffee cups used at the Statehouse's cafeteria. But he also said manufacturers testified that there are no alternatives right now for some of the products lawmakers are considering banning.
"I don't know if there are viable alternatives," Sears said.
Daniel.Barlow@timesargus.com
5