ThePopTort

Erin Brockovich II - Leroy, NY

I had just about stopped watching “Headline News.”  First it was their decision to have all their hosts try and convict Casey Anthony for murder as they sat in isolated TV studios, and then trashing the actual jury for disagreeing with them.  (Or as manic host Nancy Grace elegantly put it: "Tot Mom's lies seem to have worked. The devil is dancing tonight." ) This was followed by Joy Behar getting the axe.  What was the point of watching anymore?

Yet clicking through stations the other night, there was Erin Brockovich on HLN’s Dr. Drew Show!  And she was breaking some “stunning” news (as Dr. Drew put it) about what might be causing the terrible Tourette's like symptoms hitting teenagers in Leroy, NY, which until now many have blamed “conversion disorder, or mass hysteria.” 

But now we find out, as reported on Dr. Drew, that a1971 train derailment very close to where these kids go to school caused cyanide and 45,000 gallons of TCE to spill, and which was never cleaned up.   Erin's team went to Leroy to start taking soil samples at the school – but were sent away. 

Here’s some of what they told Dr. Drew:

HLN CORRESPONDENT JIM SPELLMAN: In that statement, Superintendent Kim Cox said the school district had hired an environmental consulting firm to review previous test results. But after being denied access to school grounds, [BOB BOWCOCK, ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATOR] remains skeptical. 

BOWCOCK: I will tell you that usually in settings or situations like this when I`m confronted by officials barring access to something, they usually have something to hide.

SPELLMAN: After taking some water samples at nearby residences, Bowcock headed to the derailment site where in 1970, over 30,000 gallons of toxic solvent TCE spilled after a train went off the tracks. Bowcock said he was surprised to find an untended cleanup site, some of the storage drums were leaking and corroded.

BOWCOCK: But what they`ve done is they`ve left 55 gallon drums of the soil, when they drilled the monitoring well, the contaminated soil came up because if you put it on (ph) on a drum, it should go to a hazardous landfill.

It`s so - it`s so hazardous that they had to put this berm in to protect the stuff from spilling back out. You have a sign like that, and 55 gallon drums rotting away, leaking material out into the environment right now, draw your own conclusion.

 …

PINSKY: And Erin keeps telling me this is a big deal. This is something unlike anything either she or Bob has ever seen in their career. Tell me why.

ERIN BROCKOVICH, ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST: Well, for some of the reasons, I mean first of all, for a couple of factors. I mean it took agencies so long to respond to a spill.

PINSKY: Twenty-five years.

BROCKOVICH: Twenty-five years.

PINSKY: So was there leeching of the spill for 25 years?

BROCKOVICH: Absolutely.

PINSKY: There’s documentation of wells being contaminated during that time.

BROCKOVICH: Absolutely.

PINSKY: People are getting jugs of water sent to them so they don’t drink the well water by the railroad company.

BROCKOVICH: Absolutely.

PINSKY: And then when they finally do respond, Bob, you say the site itself has been rendered into a toxic dump?

BOWCOCK: Oh, absolutely. They`ve gone in and excavated some of the materials to do their testing, put it in 55 gallon drums and left in there to rot and just go right back into the environment.

PINSKY: OK. So are we - are we saying that - I just want to add up the score. Summarize it for me, Erin, if you could, that this is an extraordinary situation. Bob, the dump site is unlike anything you’ve seen where the remediation site has become its own toxic spill.

BOWCOCK: Yes.

The EPA says there’s no connection to the train derailment.  Others say, "if this spill happened in 1971, why are we only see health problems now?"  Brockovich responded: 

BROCKOVICH: But very quickly just to share with you what people are reporting to me from the area, they are reporting that they grew up in that area and they`ve seen and they know of dumping. They’re reporting as adults now that as children they were told not to drink the water in or around the ball field.

I have people reporting to me who grew up in the area whose sons have tics, who were born with rare birth defects. I have children who grew up in the area who are reporting to me they had bone cancer at the age of 10. I have children who grew up in the area who are reporting to me as young adults in their early 20s that they`ve been diagnosed with acute lymphatic leukemia.

I`m getting reports from people who still live their on Maple Avenue, that there’s eight known families with very rare cancers, moving on to Erie Street, there’s more cases of cancer being reported. I have people reporting to me that their two and a half-year-olds have tic-like syndromes.

PINSKY: I`m going to stop you because we can’t substantiate this, but we get - we get the idea.

BROCKOVICH: Right. I understand. And these are all reports that we are clearly substantiating as well.

But I want something that people to understand for 21 years that I’ve been doing this, these people who come from these areas, they’re the first not to panic. They want answers and they’re reporting information to me that can help us get answers for these 12 girls, for them, and for the community as a whole.

These people have a lot better things to do in their life than sit around and make up these symptoms that can be clearly substantiated and send them to me. So what it`s telling us is that, yes, the 12 girls are exhibiting problems, but yet many other people are as well.

PINSKY: It may be the tip of the iceberg.

BROCKOVICH: Right.

HLN, I’ll be watching.

A Child’s Not-So-Fun Obstacle Course

Read some of these news stories today, and tell me that kids don’t deserve better than this:

The Minnesota Department of Health may be improperly keeping the blood newborns without the written consent of parents and turning that blood over to research.  Ugh.

Johnson & Johnson has finally agreed to remove cancer-causing chemicals from its baby products, like Johnson's Baby Shampoo, which contains formaldehyde-releasing chemicals. We should be happy about this result since the company still doesn’t admit there’s any problem subjecting babies to formaldehyde in its shampoo – as safe as “eating an apple or pear,” they say.  And they want to be sure you know that “the commitment to remove chemicals of concern does not apply to Johnson & Johnson's adult products such as those in the Aveeno or Neutrogena lines.”  In addition, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics notes that “several other top children's bath products — made by Huggies, L'Oreal, Grins & Giggles, Baby Magic, Sesame Street, CVS and others— also contain formaldehyde-releasing preservatives as well chemicals associated with 1,4 dioxane.”  Read more here.

Moving onto toys, Reuters writes:

A Power Rangers "samurai mega blade" and a Godzilla figure with dagger-like attachments are some of the most dangerous toys lurking in stores this holiday season, according to a consumer watchdog group.

Boston-based World Against Toys Causing Harm (WATCH) on Wednesday issued its annual list of the 10 worst children's toys, just in time for the shopping frenzy that typically starts in late November.

On the list were items the group said pose risks for choking, electrocution, puncture wounds and more. 

Like J&J I guess, the Toy Industry Association thinks we are all overreacting, and that reports of toy hazards like this “needlessly frighten parents.”

As for kids' clothes, it was just announced that “About 45,000 KEDS 'Know It All' girls' shoes distributed by Collective Brands Inc. are being voluntarily recalled after more than two dozen users received cuts and scratches from parts that came loose.”

And last but not least - schools. In Los Angeles, the City Council just voted to settle a lawsuit brought by the Los Angeles Unified School District because “soil underneath a high school campus in Glassell Park was contaminated by chemicals that originated at a nearby city-owned property.”  

In their lawsuit, district officials said industrial solvents and other hazardous substances had been found in soil at one end of the campus — and fingered land owned by the Bureau of Sanitation as the culprit.

We shouldn't have to worry about stuff like this.

To Frack or Not to Frack – That’s the Legal Question

New York State is becoming even more fractured over fracking (see our earlier coverage here). Hydro-fracking, you may know, is a gas-drilling method that involves blasting millions of gallons of water and chemicals into wells at high pressure, often creating significant methane gas releases and contaminating drinking water supplies.

First, take a look at this Thomson Reuters story, reporting on two ideas now being considered by New York State lawmakers, “that would give property owners more options and, perhaps, an upper hand in court, including shifting the burden of proof from landowners to gas companies and creating an industry-supported remediation fund.”  Here’s specifically what’s under consideration:

In New York, as in most other states, the plaintiff carries the burden of proving not only that the company caused the pollution, but that it did so through negligence. The time and expense required to mount such a claim and see it through the appeals process can be prohibitive to many homeowners.

A bill that stalled in both houses of the legislature this year would impose strict liability on gas companies, essentially stripping away the requirement that plaintiffs prove negligence. But that proposal, industry attorneys said, may be untenable because gas companies could be held responsible when natural phenomena trigger the migration of gas into water supplies.

Natural phenomena.  What, like fracking causes earthquakes?  Yet another great side-benefit!

The other proposals is a remediation fund proposed by Comptroller Tom DiNapoli.  Although Thomson Reuters writes that this proposal “is aimed at keeping some cases out of court altogether,” DiNapoli’s office actually wrote us in September and said, “not true.”  So we shall see.

Meanwhile, Thomson Reuters reports, “State officials have said if fracking is officially sanctioned, the DEC could begin issuing drilling permits as early as next spring, but DEC Commissioner Joe Martens said last month that it could take the agency longer to sift through the thousands of comments.”  But some cities are already saying a big “no thank you” to that.  First Albany and Buffalo – and now Syracuse, or as conservative columnist David Brooks might call these cities, hotbeds of “extremism” and “not-in-my-backyard activists.” 

Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, I guess.  Watch one of them - Kathleen Joy, Syracuse Council majority leader - on Democracy Now today.  Sound like an extremist to you?

Please, Governor Cuomo, Don't FRACK New York!!!

In 2010 things were looking good in New York, at least for our drinking water.  Here at ThePopTort we consider ourselves big fans of safe drinking water.  In fact, we prefer tap water to environmentally damaging bottled water.  Thus, we were thrilled when the New York State imposed a temporary moratorium on a drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing (better known as fracking) in horizontal wells.  In fact, we hoped New York would become the first state to ban the practice!

So imagine how aghast we were back in June when we heard that, rather than banning the risky practice altogether, New York’s Governor Andrew Cuomo planned to lift the current moratorium and open New York up to fracking. 

If you haven’t seen the documentary Gasland and you haven’t seen any of the youtube videos where homeowners light their tap water on fire, you might not know what fracking is. 

As EarthJustice explains:

“fracking is a dangerous way of getting oil and gas and a shortsighted energy strategy.  It’s poisoning our air and water and on its way to jeopardizing the health of millions more Americans.”

Besides as we just illustrated, it makes your tap water flammable!!!  So you can understand why we were upset with the Governor!

Why is fracking so dangerous?  Food and Water Watch elaborates:  

“The process of fracking means injecting millions of gallons of water, chemicals and sand into shale rock formations at high pressures to break open the rock and release the gas.  There are numerous cases of water contamination near fracking sites.  Fracking also produces a toxic wastewater that cannot be treated by standard treatment plants.  It is especially dangerous because drillers are rushing to use the technique in new areas of the country without fully evaluating the effects on human health and environment, and without adequate government oversight.”

Not surprisingly, Halliburton - the same oil and gas company that profited from the Iraq War - is now making money blasting massive amounts of chemicals into underground rock formations and those chemicals, 29 of which are known or possible carcinogens or otherwise dangerous to humans, have the potential of ending up in your ground water and ultimately your drinking glass. 

And, now, thanks to Halliburton, we don’t even have the Environmental Protection Agency or the Safe Drinking Water Act to protect us.  In 2005, then Vice President Dick Cheney – remember him – former chief executive of Halliburton, inserted something known as the Halliburton loophole into the 2005 energy bill.  It doesn’t take a genius to realize that a loophole for Halliburton can’t be good for the rest of us.  It took away the EPA’s authority to regulate fracking and removed fracking entirely from the Safe Drinking Water Act.  So right now, there’s no government oversight of the process at all.

Not long after Governor Cuomo let New Yorkers know that he’d be putting our drinking water at risk, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation released a 1547 page document outlining the state’s guidelines on fracking.  It can be found here.  New Yorkers now have 90 days, until mid-December, to read and comment on the report.  Environmental groups are already protesting this, claiming that 90 days is hardly enough time! 

But it’s not just environmental groups and civil justice groups, like us, that are concerned.  Last week, 59 scientists from around the world sent a letter to Governor Cuomo voicing their own concerns – that New York’s infrastructure can’t handle fracking and that, if it’s allowed, toxic chemicals are going to end up poisoning our water.  These scientists come from prestigious universities and institutes in 18 states and seven foreign counties and they’re concerned that if we start fracking, there’s no way to adequately protect New Yorkers’ drinking water from contamination!

As the Environmental Advocates of New York summed up, in the following statement: 

“Governor Cuomo and the Department of Environmental Conservation should take heed when independent physicians, engineers and experts tell you that the science doesn’t back up the state’s proposal to guide hydraulic fracturing or ‘fracking.’

These scientists are saying what New Yorkers have known all along.  If New York’s water is contaminated by fracking fluids our drinking water is at risk, and our filtration systems cannot protect us.”

But here’s the crazy thing.  Along with scientists and environmental groups, the very state government that seeks to allow fracking is also concerned about potential environmental disasters it will cause! That’s right.  New York’s own Comptroller, Thomas DiNapoli is so concerned about potential problems that he wants to set up a statewide fund that would pay to clean up the environmental damage occuring as the result of fracking.  Drillers would pay into his fund rather than face liability - or accountability - later on. While it is unclear whether or not this state fund would be deemed an exclusive remedy for people harmed by fracking, preventing New Yorkers from bringing lawsuits altogether, it is clear that this would limit lawsuits and potentially let some oil and gas companies off the hook for their own negligence!

In other words, lets say you’re a homeowner who gets sick because fracking contaminates your drinking water.  Ordinarily you could hire an attorney and sue the gas company that caused the contamination.  This is what’s currently happening in other states like Pennsylvania and Texas.  DiNapoli, however, believes that a statewide fund is preferable to lawsuits because a lawsuit “could be costly and time consuming because it is a private right of action.”  As he explains, “We don’t really know how many accidents or incidents are happening right now with natural gas drilling.”  Incidents might be so prevalent, in other words, we shouldn’t bother holding companies accountable.

We’re hoping that Governor Cuomo listens to the 59 scientists from around the world.  Otherwise pretty soon we might be advising you to steer clear your kitchen sink!

 

UPDATE:

This morning (9/20/2011), ThePopTort received a phone call from New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli’s office.  They read our post on fracking yesterday, and wanted to clarify their Proposal for a Natural Gas Damage Recovery Fund. 

We are happy to report that while the proposal would create a fund that is strictly liable to pay for damages and empowers the State Attorney General to recover costs from oil and gas companies, it WOULD NOT prevent New Yorkers from suing responsible oil and gas companies for damages.  In other words, it is not an exclusive remedy and does not take away the right to a private cause of action.  Additionally, the fund would ensure timely clean up of dangerous contamination and create strict liability for oil and gas companies that cause the contamination.

We’re glad that the Comptroller’s office is committed to working with New Yorkers and ensuring that any oil and gas companies that cause dangerous contamination and other environmental disasters are held accountable! 

 

Gotta Laugh.

Gosh, the news has been grim lately. There are shocking levels of poverty in this country and it is only getting worse.  SAT reading scores have fallen to the lowest level on record.  Some people cheer at the notion that someone without health insurance should be left to die.  Economist Paul Krugman tells Steven Colbert that our economy is “functionally like the Depression.” 

Actually, I think it’s more like our brains are functionally in a depression.  I know some people are thinking that a few Tanqueray martinis might be in order but I just heard about a better, healthier solution: just laugh!  Who knew?

There is a new study out about how “the physical act of laughing” itself makes us feel good.  Writes the New York Times, “The simple muscular exertions involved in producing the familiar ha, ha, ha … trigger an increase in endorphins, the brain chemicals known for their feel-good effect.”

We do our best at ThePopTort to find humor in a pretty dry topic – the tort system.  Bor-ing!  So we at least try to mock sanctimonious hypocrites whenever we can.

For example, well-know chemical company Dupont has made no secret of the fact that they dislike being sued or paying punitive damages for causing environmental disasters, which Greenpeace says “continue to jeopardize the lives of about 9 million Americans.”  For example, in 2008 we reported that Dupont would be heading straight to the appeals court to challenge a judge’s ruling that Dupont had engaged in:

wanton, willful and reckless conduct in its operation of the [zinc] smelter in the small town of Spelter, [West Virginia]...Among other things, DuPont was ordered to pay $196.2 million in punitive damages to residents who claimed the company downplayed and lied about health threats from arsenic, cadmium and lead in the air, water and soil for decades.

The company has also made it part of its political mission to push for laws that cut off the legal rights of everyday Americans.  For example, they are a member of the disturbing corporate coalition called the New Jersey Lawsuit Reform Alliance, whose sole mission is to eviscerate the legal rights of New Jersey residents.   

But today, this company took a little break from fighting jury verdicts and went ahead and got one for itself. In fact, some might even call it an eye-popping verdict - more than $919 million - after it sued a South Korea company for one of those life-or-death trade secret violations involving a Dupont fiber.  It’s the third-largest jury verdict on record for this entire year, yet still not enough for this profiteering company.  Now they want punitive damages too!

If hypocrisy like this makes you laugh, we are happy to have helped you today.  If not, well, there’s always Charlie Bit My Finger.

Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken and Missouri's Lead Smelter Verdict

In 1994, a powerful new corporate crime fighter appeared on the scene and his name was Crackers the Corporate Crime Fighting Chicken. Crackers actually did most of his work on television – two different TV shows, to be exact: TV Nation (a 2-year summer replacement series that won a 1995 Emmy for Outstanding Informational Series) and later, The Awful Truth, which aired in the spring/summer of 1999 and 2000.  Sadly, both series eventually ended and without a TV show to feature his adventures in corporate crime-fighting, Crackers slowly disappeared from the scene.  But as we just learned, his work has lived on!

In 1994, while on TV Nation, Crackers visited the Doe Run lead smelter in Herculaneum, Missouri, near St. Louis.  This smelter was poisoning kids with lead, which causes brain damage, so Crackers had a bunch of them tested, spoke to company officials, took his findings over to state regulatory officials, and basically exposed the entire mess to a much wider public.  You can read more about it here and in the wonderful book, Adventures in a TV Nation.  The segment was nomintated in 1996 for an Environmental Media Association award (although sadly for Crackers, the show lost out to one about endangered species - not that there's anything wrong with that.)

But now, all these many years later, the kids in Herculaneum are going to finally get justice thanks to a persistent community, some great lawyers and a jury that seems about as angry about what was done here as Crackers was!  As reported by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: 

The mystery Friday afternoon was not whether the jury would punish the Herculaneum lead smelter's former owners for negligently exposing 16 children to harmful lead pollution.

The jury had already said it planned to award punitive damages, on top of a $38.5 million verdict as compensation for health problems and lost lifetime earnings.

The only question still lingering in the St. Louis Circuit courtroom at the end of a three-month trial was the size of that award.

The answer: $320 million.

The amount surprised even the plaintiffs' attorneys. They had suggested to the jury a punitive award that was one-third lower.

"I'm stunned," said Gerson Smoger, a Dallas attorney who worked on the case with St. Louis attorney Mark Bronson.

"They obviously wanted to send a message: Don't choose profits over people," Bronson said. "That's what this case is about."…

This case was just one of many targeting the massive lead smelter in Herculaneum, about 30 miles south of St. Louis. The lawsuits claim former and current owners knowingly exposed residents to lead pollution, a neurotoxin that is especially harmful to children. Plaintiffs' attorneys said their clients, children growing up near the smelter, suffered lost IQ points and other health effects from lead poisoning that the company knew existed and only reluctantly revealed.

This case is the first to reach trial.

No doubt, this jury verdict is bound to brighten Crackers' view of retirement, especially in light of what might happen to his Medicare benefits.

Mann vs. Ford: Tune In Tonight on HBO

If you’re a PopTort fan, you know that there have been a few documentaries already out this year about the civil justice system, except that the business community, with all their money, can’t seem to make ones that anyone wants to watch.  I dunno, maybe the problem is their basic theme: “please feel sorry for us, we can’t make as much money as we want at the expense of everyday people, wah wah wah”.

Last Monday night, an example of this phenomenon aired on the Reelz channel, a film called Injustice that received almost no news coverage except by piggy-backing off publicity for the critically-acclaimed film Hot Coffee, and even so, was covered mostly by a few legal blogs like Above the Law, which lambasted it saying, “I’m not sure if anyone was even able to watch it. And if they had been able to do so, I’m pretty sure they would have changed the channel pretty quickly….” (We were happy to see them pick up our “this isn’t a film, it’s an infomercial” theme! ) Even noted film and media scholar Patricia Aufderheide, professor of Film and Media Arts in the School of Communication at American University and director of the Center for Social Media, noticed, tweeting: Dueling documentaries ; looks like the big-biz folks aren't as good filmmakers....http://wapo.st/qwM4N7 @hotcoffeemovie 

On the other side of that coin, once again tonight HBO airs another very powerful documentary film, called Mann v. Ford, by co-directors Maro Chermayeff and Micah Fink, which showcases how vitally important the civil justice system and plaintiff’s lawyers are to help communities seek justice when powerful corporations have harmed them. Here is what HBO says about it: 

The Ramapough Mountain Indians have lived in the hills and forests of northern New Jersey, less than 40 miles from midtown Manhattan, for hundreds of years. In the 1960s, their neighbor in nearby Mahwah, the Ford Motor Company, bought their land and began dumping toxic waste in the woods and abandoned iron mines surrounding their homes. Ford has acknowledged the dumping.

In the 1980s, the Ramapough’s homeland was placed on the Environmental Protection Agency’s list of federally monitored Superfund sites – and supposedly cleaned up by Ford. However, thousands of tons of toxic waste were left behind. In 2006, the residents of Upper Ringwood, after suffering for years from a range of mysterious ailments, including deadly cancers, skin rashes and high rates of miscarriage, filed a mass action lawsuit seeking millions of dollars from Ford as compensation for their suffering. Ford denied all responsibility for the illnesses devastating the community and claimed its flawed cleanup had fully complied with all EPA rules.

MANN v. FORD tells the story of a small community’s epic battle against two American giants: the Ford Motor Company and the Environmental Protection Agency, which failed to ensure that Ford cleaned the land of deadly toxins and erroneously declared the community safe and clean of toxic waste. The documentary debuts MONDAY, JULY 18 (9:00-10:45 p.m. ET/PT), exclusively on HBO.

Impressive. We should point out the New Jersey newspaper, The Record (reporters Jan Barry, Thomas E. Franklin, Mary Jo Layton, Tim Nostrand, Alex Nussbaum,Tom Troncone, Debra Lynn Vial, Lindy Washburn, Barbara Williams) initially broke this story for the wider public in an award-winning series called Toxic Legacy.  The paper's web site says, 

A generation ago, the Ford Motor Company churned out six millions cars and trucks at a sprawling assembly plant in Mahwah. But that remarkable production came at a cost. Before the plant closed in 1980, it also generated an ocean of pollution that was dumped in the forests of North Jersey, contaminating a mountain community in Ringwood and threatening the region’s most important watershed.

In 2005, a team of reporters from The Record spent months conducting an investigation of the failed cleanups that had taken place up to that point, and documenting its impact on the people living amid the waste.

So again, the film debuts MONDAY, JULY 18 (9:00-10:45 p.m. ET/PT), exclusively on HBO.

Listen here to co-directors Maro Chermayeff and Micah Fink:

Here’s an update on the situation from the paper that broke the story:

And here’s the HBO trailer:

Pennsylvania “Tort Reform” – Toxic Polluters and Street Criminals Rejoice!

If you live in Pennsylvania, saw the movie “Hot Coffee,” and were wondering how you might be losing your rights without even knowing it, look no further!

Your Governor just signed a law severely limiting the doctrine of "joint and several liability," which had been part of your common law since, well, the beginning of Pennsylvania!  The business groups call it the so-called "Fair Share Act," but let's be clear - this is nothing "fair" about this law for you. 

The largely-eviscerated doctrine of joint and several liability was a fairness rule, however, developed by courts over centuries to protect everyday  people.  It comes into play after more than one wrongdoer is found fully or substantially responsible for causing an injury (not 1% or 10% responsible, as is commonly misstated). If one wrongdoer is insolvent or cannot pay their share, the other fully-responsible wrongdoer(s) must pick up the tab, to make sure the innocent victim is fully compensated. 

For example, suppose two toxic polluters recklessly contaminate drinking water, causing leukemia in neighborhood children. The actions of any one of them alone would be sufficient to cause leukemia.  But because two companies were involved, each one's relative share becomes only one-half.  This fortuitous circumstance allows them to split the total compensation owed. Now in Pennsylvania, if one of those two companies becomes insolvent and cannot pay any compensation, tough for you!  The law used to be that the other company would have to cover the insolvent company's share.  But no more. The polluter is now off the hook even though it was found fully responsible for causing the leukemia.  (If you don’t believe me, check out this article by Richard Wright called The Logic and Fairness of Joint and Several Liability).

And here is something else you should know.  Joint and several liability is often invoked to help protect crime victims.  Let’s say you or someone you love is sexually assaulted and her rapist got into the apartment building because the landlord refused to fix a broken lock.  By limiting joint and several liability, as was just done in Pennsylvania, she is prevented from any real recovery since in most violent crime situations, the criminal has little money or few assets.

So, thank you Pennsylvania lawmakers.  Polluters and street criminals sure appreciate it.

The Gulf Oil Spill: Where we are a year later

It's been a year since the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion, so we decided to scour the news to find some unique articles about the situation today.  From personal accounts of how residents in the Gulf are still struggling to studies of the long term effects of the chemical dispersant used to mitigate the spill, below are seven articles that you might find interesting.  You can also check the Center for Justice & Democracy's project, BP Justice Now!, for additional updates particulary regarding the claims situation. 

Lest people assume the worst is behind us, Mother Jones lists “10 Reasons to Still Be Pissed Off About the BP Disaster” noting, among other issues: the concern that while some attention is being paid to spill cleanup workers' health, resident health issues are going unattended; that Congress has failed to change any oil or gas drilling laws since the spill; and that fewer than half the people who have filed claims from the spill have been paid.

Alternet's “’The Oil Is Not Gone”:  BP Tries to Block Gulf Residents from Shareholder Meeting”  shares Antonia Juhasz's account of BP’s first shareholder meeting since the Gulf oil disaster and their refusal to grant access to Gulf Coast residents, who had traveled all the way to London to speak.  The residents were refused entry even though they had proxies, which gave them legal access to attend the meeting.  Unlike the rest of the delegation, Juhasz, an author and activist, gained access as a guest without voting rights or the right to speak.  Regardless, she spoke and shared a statement prepared by the father of Gordon Jones, who died on the Deepwater Horizon.

The Food & Water Watch report, “A Year After the Spill  The Consequences of COREXIT”, describes the harmful effects of COREXIT, the highly-toxic dispersant used to mitigate the oil spill. They note that COREXIT is manufactured by Nalco Holding Company, whose board of directors includes a former BP executive and board member. Rather than eliminating oil, dispersants break oil down into less visible particles that remain as toxins as they sink to the bottom of the ocean.  The report discusses the potential negative impact on wildlife, the economy, and human health – noting that the average age of death of those who worked with dispersants in Alaska is about 50 years.

The Times-Picayune's “Father of man who died in Gulf oil rig explosion is intent on making sure his son’s death was not in vain” explains that Keith Jones, a lawyer and the father of the late Gordon Jones, who died on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig, has devoted the past year to efforts to change the Death on the High Seas Act (which we've covered). This law prevents the recovery of anything but monetary damages (lost wages, funeral expenses) for the families of these workers.  Jones, still grieving, testified before congressional committees and paid his own way to Washington multiple times, however lobbying efforts by cruise lines and shipping companies blocked a Senate vote.

The BBC interviewed local fishermen from Delaxcroix Island in Louisiana in “Gulf oil spill:  ‘The monster under the water’” The fishermen believe, after the oil spill, their way of life will disappear.

The National Geographic article, “A Year After the Spill, “Unusual” Rise in Health Problems” discusses that “nearly three quarters of those who believed they’d been exposed to crude oil experienced an “unusual increase in health symptoms”" and by early September “more than 2,100 acute health complaints related to the spill across the Gulf and elsewhere had come in.”  In addition to the physical impact the spill has had and will continue to have on workers, the mental impact, issues of anxiety and depression, is also a problem. 

In “Longtime oil industry champion now calls BP liars, almost a year after oil spill”, the Times-Picayune shares the story of Ryan Lambert, owner of Cajun Fishing Adventures Lodge in Buras, Louisiana.  Lambert trusted the oil industry when they said they would take care of any problems that might occur in the region, but he now considers them liars.  After receiving an initial emergency payment from BP, he started the complicated and frustrating process of proving additional losses and now intends to sue.  He notes there are people in a worse situation than him, those who took BP’s quick final payment because they had no other choice and had to give up all their legal rights.  He also discusses his fears for the long-term effects on the ecosystem and BP’s public relations campaign.

By the way, for anyone thinking about joining the federal lawsuit against BP, Halliburton and Transocean, April 20, 2011 is the deadline for including claims against Transocean, the rig owner. (Luckily, anyone can join the lawsuit now by filing out this easy 3-page form, which can be done without an attorney.)

Drink to Your Health But Watch Out for Water

News broke over the weekend about the new Environmental Working Group (EWG) study, released today, showing that, “Tap water from 31 of 35 U.S. cities tested contains hexavalent chromium (or chromium-6), the carcinogenic ‘Erin Brockovich chemical,’ with the 'highest levels were detected in Norman, Okla.; Honolulu, Hawaii; and Riverside, Calif.'"  That’s about 74 million Americans in 42 states – at least.  This nasty chemical “is commonly discharged from steel and pulp mills as well as metal-plating and leather-tanning facilities. It can also pollute water through erosion of soil and rock.”  Yum.

Add this to the atrazine crisis we coverd earlier this year and it seems to me that drinking water has lately become pretty deadly in America.  Or at least, we are just now finding out about it thanks to the good work of environmental groups.

As the Washington Post reported over the weekend, the EWG study “comes as the Environmental Protection Agency is considering whether to set a limit for hexavalent chromium in tap water. The agency is reviewing the chemical after the National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, deemed it a ‘probable carcinogen’ in 2008.”

Erin Brockovich told the paper, "This chemical has been so widely used by so many industries across the U.S. that this doesn't surprise me. … Our municipal water supplies are in danger all over the U.S.  This is a chemical that should be regulated."

Here’s the science: “Hexavalent chromium has long been known to cause lung cancer when inhaled, but scientists only recently found evidence that it causes cancer in laboratory animals when ingested. It has been linked in animals to liver and kidney damage as well as leukemia, stomach cancer and other cancers.”

So, 2008.  Why is regulation taking so long?  Well, probably some of this is due to the industry disinformation compaign.  As EWG reported,

PG&E [the company responsible in the Brockovich case] hired consultants to publish a fraudulent analysis of cancer mortality in Chinese villagers exposed to hexavalent chromium, in an attempt to disprove the link between the chemical and cancer. The study was published in the respected Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, and scientists and regulators — including the EPA — cited the fraudulent article in research and safety assessments. The journal retracted the paper in 2006 in response to EWG’s request for corrective action.

Speaking of 2008, that’s actually the last time we covered hexavalent chromium, after 60 Mintues reported that soldiers in Iraq, tasked with protecting KBR contractors at a water plant contaminted with hexavalent chromium, were dying from lung cancer.  Hexavalent chromium.  The gift that keeps on giving.