NEWS OF THE WEEK
AN EVOLVING DEBATE REGULATION: Industry is split on
reform of U.S. chemical law
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
T
HE LINES OF DEBATE on whether Congress
should change the federal law governing the manufacture of chemicals used to be simple. Environmental and health advocates favored an overhaul of the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), and the chemical industry was against it. But the discussion has evolved and shifted. Now, the biggest differences of opinion arguably may be within the chemical sector itself. Last week, several groups staked out relatively detailed positions on what they want in TSCA reform. A sizable part of the chemicals sector is calling for significant modifications of that law, including some that are strikingly similar to what activists want. Others in the industry, meanwhile, remain against major changes. Such positioning comes as Congress is showing an increased interest in overhauling TSCA (C&EN, March 9, page 24). In the coming weeks, the Obama Administration is expected to offer its position on revising that law. The American Chemistry Council, an industry organization that represents many large chemical manufacturers, is calling for modernization of TSCA. This is needed, says Calvin M. Dooley, the group’s president
PETER CUTTS PHOTOGRAPHY
Denison
Dooley
RESISTING HEALTH CARE REFORM POLICY: Drugmakers find
fault with overhaul plan
L MOLLY RILEY/REUTERS/NEWSCOM
House Energy & Commerce Committee members iron out health care reform legislation.
EGISLATION MOVING through the House of
Representatives that would overhaul the $2.5 trillion health care system would hurt patients and kill jobs, the drug industry charged last week. The drug industry “remains committed to working with the Administration and Congress to help enact comprehensive health care reform this year,” says Ken Johnson of the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), a trade group that lobbies on behalf of brand-name drug companies. “Unfortunately, the totality of the efforts in the House, while well intentioned, represents a step in the wrong direction in the health care reform debate,” Johnson adds. The House Energy & Commerce Committee narrowly approved legislation (H.R. 3200) on July 31 that is designed to provide health care to 50 million uninsured Americans. But PhRMA contends that the bill would WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
8
and CEO, because the public doesn’t have confidence in the current U.S. chemical management system. For instance, ACC wants Congress to change the law so that EPA is required to declare certain uses of commercial chemicals as safe. Currently, TSCA only authorizes the agency to examine whether a chemical could harm people or the environment. Backing ACC’s positions are two trade groups representing companies that are a key market for commercial substances: the Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA) and the Soap & Detergent Association. In contrast, the Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates, which represents many smaller companies, is against a major overhaul of the law. The organization suggests that Congress “preserve TSCA” by making only targeted updates as they are needed. Meanwhile, a coalition of health and environmental groups called Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families is calling for a major rewrite of TSCA. The positions of these activists and of ACC are markedly similar on several issues, say Richard Denison, a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, which is part of the coalition, and Christopher Cathcart, president and CEO of CSPA. For example, the coalition and ACC generally agree on EPA being required to declare chemicals safe. But there are differences as well. In contrast to ACC’s position, activists want federal support for greener chemistry research as well as a national policy favoring more benign products over those posing potential health hazards.—CHERYL HOGUE
severely restrict patient access and choice and would damage the drug industry, which employs hundreds of thousands of workers. One key provision added to the legislation by Rep. Peter F. Welch (D-Vt.) would require the Department of Health & Human Services to negotiate directly with manufacturers for lower prices in the popular Medicare prescription drug program. Drug companies and the private insurers that administer the program argue that they already provide large discounts for millions of Medicare beneficiaries and that forced negotiations would lead to government price controls. The committee also approved an amendment by Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) to prohibit brand-name drug companies from settling patent disputes by paying generics firms to delay the introduction of their cheaper products (C&EN, June 15, page 21). “By imposing an outright ban on settlements, the amendment has the unintended effect of benefiting the brand industry and ultimately harming consumers by keeping more affordable generics from getting to the market in a timely manner,” says Kathleen Jaeger, president of the Generic Pharmaceutical Association. That’s because settlements still allow generics manufacturers to introduce cheaper drugs before the patents expire on their brand counterparts.—GLENN HESS
AUGUST 10, 2009
