The Alabama House of Representatives passed a bill Thursday that could weaken the state’s environmental laws.
SB 71, sponsored by Sen. Donnie Chesteen, R-Geneva, would mandate that the state cannot have stricter environmental regulations than the federal government.
“This bill provides a way in which the state of Alabama can pass its own regulations related to the environment in the event that the federal government does not address those particular matters, we will, in those cases, use generally accepted scientific practices and sound science rules to do that,” Rep. Troy Stubbs, R-Wetumpka, who carried the legislation in the House, said Thursday.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
The bill, which goes to Gov. Kay Ivey, moved quickly through both chambers, alarming environmentalists and Democrats who said it could leave Alabamians more vulnerable to pollution and unsafe environmental conditions.
“Our state will feel the impact of this decision for decades to come,” Sarah Stokes, senior attorney at the Southern Environment Law Center in Alabama, said in a statement Tuesday evening. “We hope that the governor takes a hard look at the actual language of the bill and recognizes that signing it into law would be harmful to the people of Alabama,”
The bill passed 68-34. Five Republicans — Reps. Jennifer Fidler, R-Silverhill; Bob Fincher, R-Woodland; Matthew Hammett, R-Dozier and Chris Sells, R-Greenville — joined Democrats to vote against the bill.
The bill would allow the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) to adopt emergency rules if it can prove there is immediate danger to public health, safety or welfare. But in those cases, it requires ADEM to use what the bill defines as “best available science” and the “weight of scientific evidence.” That could include collecting specific data at sites.
The bill would also require ADEM to establish a “direct causal link” between exposure to a harmful chemical or pollutant and bodily harm in humans. Critics said that kind of science does not exist, and that the requirement for specific data would effectively delay help to people exposed to harmful substances or pollutants.
Hammett was the only Republican to speak in opposition to the bill.
“I told you the other day why I was a little bit leery to this, and what I’m having to deal with in my county,” Hammett said to Stubbs during debate. “I just hope that this does not open up a can of worms and I think [Alabama Department of Environmental Management] ADEM should be able to if they see a problem to step in here and say ‘Hey we need to do this.’”
Rep. Curtis Travis, D-Tuscaloosa, said local issues are the reason the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has put standards in place.
“Most people don’t realize when we start talking about rolling back environmental protection regulations and changing them becomes an issue, because it is usually local circumstances or situations that cause people to react and to set environmental standards,” he said.
Rep. Sam Jones, D-Mobile, had concerns with the bill’s language surrounding cancer.
“I don’t know if it’s possible to give a direct cause of cancer,” Jones said during debate. “I don’t know if that is possible because there are so many different kinds, and when EPA or health officials determine that there’s a certain pocket in the country, or even in the state, that have very high levels of this particular cancer. They can’t tell you exactly what causes that, but they know that the people in this area are exposed to the same environmental health.”
Jones brought an amendment to the floor that would have removed the word “direct” from the bill in reference to needing a direct cause of cancer or other kinds of bodily harm to adopt new rules or change existing ones. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 68-30.
Rep. Mary Moore, D-Birmingham, also had concerns about the language surrounding bodily harm in the bill.
“It’s not just the Clean Water Act, but it’s a combination of everything, and we have to have regulations, whether it’s a farmer, the type of fertilizer the farmer uses, the type of whatever chemicals they use to make sure that their animals are what appear to be healthy,” Moore said. “But the impact of those same chemicals when you add heat to the meat product can cause other illnesses and people who eat the meat. So it’s a combination of all of that we have to be concerned about. And we can’t allow it to be just a state by state by state thing. It needs to be on a national level.”
After debating for two hours, Rep. Chip Brown, R-Hollinger’s Island, made a motion to end debate that passed 72-30. Hammett was the only Republican to vote against the motion.
If Ivey signs the bill, it will go into effect immediately.
Independent Journalism for All
As a nonprofit newsroom, our articles are free for everyone to access. Readers like you make that possible. Can you help sustain our watchdog reporting today?
link