Some top US lobbying firms are simultaneously working both sides of the Pfas “forever chemicals” issue, raising serious conflict of interest questions and concerns that their activity is slowing states’ efforts to rein in the public health threat.
The review of six states’ lobbying records conducted by the non-profit F-Minus found a range of scenarios in which firms lobbied both sides. Most common Pfas are linked to cancer. The lobbying firm Holland & Knight works for the American Chemistry Council, which represents the nation’s largest Pfas makers, and aggressively opposes most regulations. Simultaneously, Holland & Knight lobbies for the American Cancer Society.
In a statement to the Guardian, Holland & Knight said they follow “rigorous ethics and conflict-review procedures in all of its legal and public policy work”.
They claim: “the report’s conclusions are based on a flawed premise that assumes any client relationship means the firm is advocating on that client’s behalf on every policy issue. That is a mischaracterization of the nature of the firm’s work for its clients and mistakenly implies conflicts where none exist.”
Lobbyist Rocky Dallum of the Tonkon Torp firm lobbied against a state bill in Oregon that would have banned Pfas in many consumer goods. He also lobbied for the Oregon Bioscience Association for funding for rare diseases screening in newborns. In-utero Pfas exposure is linked to decreased immunity, neurotoxic effects, rare cancers and other health issues.
In New Jersey, state records show the Princeton Public Affairs Group lobbied for and against a bill that banned Pfas in some consumer goods. The company made $96,000, F-Minus found.
Industry and lobbyists frequently succeed in killing public health bills, or leaders sometimes enact “half measures”, said James Browning, F Minus’s executive director, and a former lobbyist. Either way, the lobbying groups get paid.
“Whatever negative publicity damage it might do to their reputation on the wrong side of forever chemicals is mitigated by some of the good work they do for schools or cancer groups,” Browning said.
The review found 26 healthcare systems, 11 public school systems, 15 wildlife groups and 132 local governments that share lobbying firms with Pfas makers or trade groups, including the American Chemistry Council and Cookware Sustainability Alliance. The lobbyists work across 36 states.
The report comes amid a broad effort at all levels of the government that aims to rein in Pfas pollution and exposures. The chemicals are widely used in consumer goods and industry, and are linked to a range of health problems like cancer, birth defects, decreased immunity, kidney disease and hormone disruption.
The public health effort has drawn an intense lobbying operation in opposition by the chemical industry, which has killed most Pfas legislation in recent years. The F-Minus analysis zeroed in on six states because laws around lobbying disclosures are weak in most states, making it virtually impossible to track the activity. F-Minus is in the process of assembling a congressional lobbying tracker, Browning said.
The report used lobbying around two Pfas-related bills in California to illustrate how the scenario may slow efforts to rein in Pfas while enriching lobbyists who play both sides. SB 682 proposed banning Pfas in cookware and some other consumer products, while SB 454 created a private fund to help clean up Pfas in water.
Pfas in consumer products is a source of water pollution, and water utilities across the state supported the consumer products ban.
The lobbying firm KP Public Affairs made nearly $275,000 lobbying for and against SB 682. It represented multiple chemical makers or trade groups opposed to it. It lobbied in favor of the bill for the Western Municipal Water District. The Public Policy Advocates firm, meanwhile, lobbied for the cleanup fund, and, while representing the American Chemistry Council, worked against the consumer products ban.
Newsom vetoed the consumer product ban, but not the cleanup fund, meaning Pfas-laden products will continue to pollute California water and fuel the demand for cleanup. The veto gave the “double dipping lobbying firms the ability to claim a win with their industrial, PFAS-using clients, and also claim a win with their clients who supported SB 454, despite the fact that this veto will further contamination of California’s water systems with Pfas”, the report states.
State and federal laws do not prohibit firms from lobbying on both sides of an issue, and it is quite common, said Craig Holman, an ethics lobbyist with Public Citizen, a campaign finance watchdog. However, firms can be held legally liable to their clients if there is any cooperation or sharing of information between the two sides, Holman added. And the situation raises credibility questions.
“Most firms want to be recognized as renowned experts in advocating a specific position,” Holman said. “Lobbying both sides of an issue obfuscates that type of reputation.”
Browning, who used to lobby for the American Cancer Society, said there is a “halo effect” in lobbying for public health organizations, but it is undeserved if lobbyists are working for both sides. Some organizations know that the firms they hire are conflicted, but still do not cut ties, Browning said. Other groups likely do not know their lobbying firms are playing both sides.
Meanwhile, Pfas harm animals. Among wildlife groups that share lobbying firms with the American Chemistry Council are Marine Mammal Center in California, Salmon For All in Oregon and the New York League of Conservation Voters.
A Pennsylvania state law requires schools to test drinking water for several Pfas compounds. Four Philadelphia schools have been found to be in violation of state standards. The city of Philadelphia and American Chemistry Council share the lobbying firm, Holland & Knight.
The American Chemistry Council has lobbied for federal laws that would kill state rules around Pfas. Holland & Knight received $80,000 and $520,000 from Philadelphia and the American Chemistry Council, respectively, the report found.
After widespread Pfas contamination was found in Maine’s farmland and drinking water supplies, the state enacted a ban on non-essential uses of Pfas, including most consumer goods. The law allows some products to be exempted. The Preti Flaherty firm is working on behalf of the Cookware Sustainability Alliance to get cookware exempted, records show. It is also lobbying against a bill to require health insurers to pay for residents to check their blood for the chemicals.
At the same time, Preti Flaherty lobbies for the Portland Water District, which is dealing with Pfas-contaminated water and recently joined a lawsuit against 18 Pfas manufacturers, the report noted.
The report calls on groups and governments to cut ties with conflicted firms, just as many did with tobacco industry lobbyists.
“The goal is to put lobbying firms that are playing both sides of the issue in the spotlight so they have to pick a side on whether they’re with us and our families, or whether they’re with the chemical industry,” Zimmer said.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: theguardian.com
