[D]uring the last Legislature, 20 of 34 state representatives in the eight-county region rejected five anti-pollution amendments. Those measures would have boosted TCEQ health screening levels, forced companies to provide continuous monitoring of emissions and fined violators who made repeated chemical releases near vulnerable communities. The legislators’ votes split on party lines; all Republicans voted no.
Anyone who lives in the Houston area, or has even a passing familiarity with the eight-county metropolitan area, knows that industrial pollution is one of the largest and most intractable problems we face. This fact is not improved by the fact the Houston-area Republican legislators (“The Toxic 20”) have been among the chief enablers of plants and refineries far more concerned with the bottom line than with the health and well-being of their neighbors.
It’s both our blessing and our curse that so much of our nation’s petrochemical industry is located here in the Houston area. This industry is perhaps the largest employer and economic engine that drives the southeast Texas economy. Yet, the petrochemical industry is also resposnsible for rendering parts of the Houston area virtually uninhabitable. With the thousands of tons of pollutants that are thrown into our air every years, there are parts of the Houston metropolitan area where Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) monitors were gas masks out of concern for their health. Imagine what it must be like to live in these areas- and it’s not places like River Oaks or Clear Lake that we’re talking about, with their wealthy, predominantly White demographic makeup. No, it’s parts of Houston such as the East End or Manchester, with their largely poor and lower middle-class minority population. Of course, these folks don’t donate to Republican causes, so they pretty much deserve what they get, eh?
It’s amazing how many Houston-area legislators say they’re for clean air, except when it comes time to vote on measures that would achieve that goal….
A 2004 report by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality documented 11 Houston-area hot spots where monitors had detected levels of chemical emissions high enough to threaten public health. Seven of those sites involved concentrations of carcinogenic pollutants that can elevate the incidence of cancer in people who suffer long-term exposure.
Most of the sites are near chronically polluted communities along the Houston Ship Channel. One of the worst locations pinpointed in the TCEQ report is the Lynchburg Ferry, where a cocktail of 11 different toxic chemicals produced more than 70 instances when foul odors were noticeable. Texas and Harris County have two pollution cases pending against Channel Shipyard, a barge-cleaning facility and suspected source of some of the air pollution.
It’s interesting to note that most of the communities that abut the Houston Ship Channel are far lower on the socioeconomic food chain than more powerful and well-heeled than areas such as Clear Lake and River Oaks. Of course, in many instance, locating a business along the Ship Channel makes good economic sense- easy access to to water-borne transportation, for instance. Then again, since lawyers, politicians, and CEOs generally don’t live in communities such as Manchester and the East End, there is no one in positions of power and/or influence who can speak on behalf of the poor and lower middle-class families who do.
Houston Mayor Bill White has taken steps to crack down on air polluters. He is using the volunteer services of noted civil attorney David Berg to negotiate with local industry to reduce emissions or face legal action. He’s also set up City Council’s first Environmental and Public Health Commission, chaired by Councilwoman Carol Alvarado. A native of the Manchester community in one of the most polluted zones, Alvarado has called for tougher enforcement of existing laws and the creation of more stringent air quality standards.
Indeed, the problem generally isn’t that there aren’t laws on the books designed to protect those who live in the vicinity of plants and refineries. Certainly, some of these laws could stand to be toughened and clarified, but the real problem here is the lack of enforcement. Until Houston Mayor Bill White took office, no local official had the balls to take on the petrochemical industry. White, a successful businessman himself, understands that these industries exist in a hypercompetitive global economy. He also understands that these industries have a responsibility to be good neighbors and good stewards of the environment.
Of course, being good neighbors and good stewards of the environment costs money, and like any business, the petrochemical industry is loathe to spend money for items that provide no tangible return on investment. “Doing the right thing” is all well and good, but try explaining that to shareholders wondering why a company’s stock price is underperforming.
The “Toxic 20” understand which side their bread is buttered on. These folks also understand that the significant contributions they receive from the petrochemical industry will disappear if they do not faithfully represent the interests of those industries. Hey, if an indistry can’t buy good government, it will simply look elsewhere to purchase favorable legislative consideration.
Democrats blamed pressure from the chemical industry. One of the amendment sponsors, Toby Goodman, R-Arlington, seconded that assertion. He also blamed legislators’ stereotypical view that anyone who votes for cleaner air and water is “some sort of liberal activist.”
Never mind that voting for cleaner air and water is voting to protect those who voices too often go unheard in the legislative process for one reason- lack of money. It’s as true in Austin as it is in Washington- money buys access, access buys influence, and influence ultimately creats legislation favorable to those providing the money. Thus it ever was, and thus it shall ever be.
Some legislators who voted no claim they support higher air quality standards but that the amendments were poorly researched and unfair to industry. If those lawmakers were really concerned about clean air, they would have researched and drafted amendments that they could have supported.
Those who must breathe the polluted air in our communities should remember such statements when they vote in the March primaries and the general election in November. A clean environment shouldn’t be a partisan issue, but the Toxic 20 are doing their best to make it one.
There is still the ultimate power of accountability available to those who do not feel that legislators are adequately representing their interests in Austin. That would be the power of the ballot box. If voters make a conscious decision to make clean air and water an issue, then it will become one. No matter how much money petrochemical industry lobbyists throw at Republican legislators, they still cannot buy votes at the ballot box. The decisions we make in the primary and general elections will determine what sort of future we and out children face and whether or not the Texas Legislature will make the health and well-being of their fellow Texans a priority. Clean air and water will become an issue in Austin only if and when we make it one…and isn’t it about time?
