Limiting Pesticides
pesticides that he wanted it to, but he thought it was a good start for better regulation. “A coalition of the Sierra Club, National Wildlife Federation, Izaak Walton League, Audubon Society, and the Wilderness Society called the House bill ‘a retreat from effective pesticide regulation.’” They were looking for bans and strict regulations because of the pollution it was causing. Hart and Nelson debated to reinforce citizen’s rights in order to sue the EPA over bad enforcement of the proposed law. However, Poage was more concerned over the industries that will be affected by limiting pesticides. Poage called for indemnification for manufacturers whose pesticides are legally removed from the market. Hart and Allen were largely against giving
…show more content…
The conference report touched on all 26 sections of the bill with the final amendments stating that the house would recede from their disagreement to the amendments of the senate bill. The amendments and debates intensely discussed the language use in the bill, and spent a lot of time choosing their words carefully. A main compromise that went into the final version of the law was “substantial effects on the environment” was changed to “unreasonable effects on the environment.” It went from taking into account public interest to taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of using the pesticide. This compromise was made to a Senate amendment after it went through its second committee, the commerce committee. This ended up making the regulations a little less strict. With many proposals suggested for the indemnification process, the final version determines that administrators and manufacturers of pesticides will not be indemnified but they should be able to call hearings when they believe it is useful rather than just getting issues of intent to cancel their product. This allows them review of their product before placing a stigma on their product. The compromise that came about over classification of chemicals and pesticides ended with giving the administrator the decision in cancelling or changing classification. It also allows participation by outside parties in suspending use and classifying chemicals. The Senate amendments that were fully approved were having the manufacturer apply for registration of a product with all test data to the EPA and ensure no information is hidden from the public on ground that it’s a trade secret. Another amendment by the Senate permits citizen
The conference report touched on all 26 sections of the bill with the final amendments stating that the house would recede from their disagreement to the amendments of the senate bill. The amendments and debates intensely discussed the language use in the bill, and spent a lot of time choosing their words carefully. A main compromise that went into the final version of the law was “substantial effects on the environment” was changed to “unreasonable effects on the environment.” It went from taking into account public interest to taking into account the economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits of using the pesticide. This compromise was made to a Senate amendment after it went through its second committee, the commerce committee. This ended up making the regulations a little less strict. With many proposals suggested for the indemnification process, the final version determines that administrators and manufacturers of pesticides will not be indemnified but they should be able to call hearings when they believe it is useful rather than just getting issues of intent to cancel their product. This allows them review of their product before placing a stigma on their product. The compromise that came about over classification of chemicals and pesticides ended with giving the administrator the decision in cancelling or changing classification. It also allows participation by outside parties in suspending use and classifying chemicals. The Senate amendments that were fully approved were having the manufacturer apply for registration of a product with all test data to the EPA and ensure no information is hidden from the public on ground that it’s a trade secret. Another amendment by the Senate permits citizen