MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — Some Republican lawmakers are seeking to limit their state’s ability to set environmental regulations, a move that comes as President Donald Trump’s administration pushes to roll back environmental rules on power plants, water and greenhouse gases.
The Alabama Legislature on Tuesday approved legislation backed by business groups that would prevent state agencies from setting restrictions on pollutants and hazardous substances that exceed those set by the federal government. In areas where there are no federal standards, the state could adopt new rules only if there is a “direct causal link” between exposure to harmful emissions and “manifest bodily harm” to people.
Supporters said the Alabama measure would ground the standards in “sound science” and prevent regulatory overreach. Environmental groups said it would affect the state’s ability to respond to environmental or health risks, including a group of chemicals known as PFAS, or forever chemicals, that have contaminated areas in the South.
Sarah Stokes, a senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, said the bill sets an “impossible hurdle” for state regulations because the bill specifies that an “increased risk of disease” is not enough to prove harm to humans.
“It’s a blank check for companies. We’re basically sacrificing human health for business,” Stokes said. “This does not seem like the best calculation for our citizens.”
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and business groups supported the legislation, and the bill’s sponsor, Republican Sen. Donnie Chesteen, told a legislative committee this month that his bill was “pro-business” legislation.
“If we’re going to be able to compete with the southeastern states to attract and bring in some of these businesses, then we need to adopt these standards so that it’s clearly defined what our companies are working with,” Chesteen said. Supporters also argued that the bill follows Trump’s deregulatory agenda.
“This does not remove the use of sound science and legitimate science,” Republican Rep. Troy Stubbs said during the debate. “What it does is protect Alabama and the people of Alabama from a runaway government that can become overly burdensome and over-regulatory to the point where it raises the cost of living.”
Stubbs contested that it would weaken existing rules, saying current state regulations would remain in place. However, environmental lawyer Stokes said she was concerned that businesses could use it as a basis to challenge existing rules.
The measure is the latest effort to tighten environmental regulations at the state level. Indiana Gov. Mike Braun signed an executive order last year that says Indiana cannot have new environmental rules stricter than federal ones unless deemed necessary by state law or the governor. Tennessee lawmakers passed legislation last year requiring any regulations stricter than federal regulations to be based on links to “manifest bodily harm to humans.”
Stokes said the Alabama proposal goes further than the Tennessee law. A similar bill has been introduced in Utah.
Stokes said the Alabama legislation was introduced after advocacy groups convinced the Alabama Environmental Management Commission to consider updating state standards for arsenic and cyanide and 11 other toxic pollutants.
Cara Horowitz, professor of environmental law and executive director of the Emmett Institute for Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA School of Law, said the legislation would prevent state agencies from making “independent decisions about how much to protect public health from things like water pollution, air pollution and toxic substances.”
“Alabama could adopt its own pollution standard only where the state’s rationale is based on a very particular kind of science,” Horowitz wrote in an email. “Alabama could not, for example, rely on studies showing a correlation between exposure to pollution and an increased risk of disease.”
The bill also prohibits agencies from using EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System, which characterizes the health hazards of chemicals found in the environment, as the default basis for water quality standards. A chemical industry lobby group criticized the system as overly burdensome and scientifically flawed.
Democrats in the Alabama Legislature spoke against the bill for two hours, until GOP lawmakers voted to end debate and force a vote.
Democratic Rep. Chris England said the bill turns Alabamians into test subjects. “We’re a petri dish for businesses to do whatever they want until they kill people,” England said.
Rep. Neil Rafferty, also a Democrat, said the bill “defines sound science only to destroy our ability to use it to drive science-based, data-driven policy.”
The state House of Representatives voted 88-34 for the bill, which now goes to Republican Gov. Kay Ivey. Her office did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.