OpenForum – a blog by the Health and Human Rights community

California has a reputation for leading the nation in the implementation of environmental health policies – policies that protect millions of people from the adverse effects of hazardous chemicals. Unfortunately, California’s ability to remain a leader in environmental health – or even to maintain its current environmental health standards – may be threatened by Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposal to eliminate the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

The OEHHA’s mission is “to protect and enhance public health and the environment by scientific evaluation of risks posed by hazardous substances.” Its responsibilities include determining the health risks of air pollution, water pollution, and contaminants in consumer goods. The OEHHA also develops exposure standards and provides public health oversight for other California Environmental Protection Agency programs.

Even though the budget proposal states that the functions of the OEHHA will be transferred to the California Department of Public Health, there has been an outcry among some environmental activists and public health officials in response to the Governor’s proposal to eliminate the agency. Dr. Gina Solomon, a Senior Scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council and Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine at the University of California at San Francisco, has been particularly outspoken, with blog posts at Switchboard and the Huffington Post, and an opinion piece in the LA Times. She believes that the OEHHA must remain an independent agency in order to fully protect the health of Californians, in part because the recommendations of the OEHHA sometimes run counter to policies supported by other state agencies. Loss of independence from the rest of the state government may therefore compromise the ability of the OEHHA (or whatever its future incarnation is called) to operate in a way that best protects California residents.

Schwarzenegger proposed eliminating the OEHHA in order to help the cash-strapped California government cut back on spending. But with an annual budget of less than $20 million, the OEHHA is a small drop in the vast bucket of the $135 billion state budget. That drops looks even smaller when one digs into the budget details to find that over $11 million of the money that funds the OEHHA comes from sources other than general tax revenue. These sources include regulatory fees, fines, and the sale of personalized license plates. The spending of the revenue from these other sources is dictated by law and is not covered by the new budget proposal. Given the small financial impact of eliminating the OEHHA, Solomon suggests that closing the agency is actually an attempt to appease groups like Big Tobacco and Dow Chemical, whose activities may cause the health problems from which the OEHHA is trying to protect Californians. If Solomon is correct, then the Governor’s proposal to eliminate the OEHHA represents one more instance of the desires of powerful interest groups winning out over the public’s right to good health.

Whatever the motivation, eliminating the OEHHA will negatively impact public health in California if the Department of Public Health cannot adequately assume the OEHHA’s responsibilities. And without California to lead the way in reducing pollution and informing the public about hazardous substances in consumer products, where will that leave the rest of the country?

OEHHA in the news:

Toxic fish found in Inland lakes

Anglers warned not to eat fish from Pinto Lake

PANNA: California Finds Lawn Chemical Dangerous to Health

California Identifies Secondhand Smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant

California Wants to Significantly Lower Level of Arsenic in Tap Water

Selected Publications by OEHHA scientists:

Environ Health Perspectives: Outcomes of the California Ban on Pharmaceutical Lindane: Clinical and Ecologic Impacts

Environ Health Perspectives: Development of a Health-Protective Drinking Water Level for Perchlorate

Environ Health Perspectives: Evaluation and Application of the RD₅₀ for Determining Acceptable Exposure Levels of Airborne Sensory Irritants for the General Public

Environ Health Perspectives: Air pollution and emergency room visits for asthma in Santa Clara County, California.

Environ Health Perspectives: Residential Traffic and Children’s Respiratory Health