SECTION: A; Pg. 26

LENGTH: 337 words

HEADLINE: PESTICIDE SAFETY;
Legislation to 'improve' 1996 act warrants caution

SOURCE: Staff

BODY:
The Regulatory Fairness and Openness Act (HR 1592), having to do with Environmental Protection Agency oversight of pesticides in things Americans grow and market, seems to fall short in both fairness and openness.

The bill's backers say it was introduced to tweak the 1996 Food Quality Protection Act, which sets forth restrictions concerning use of potentially dangerous pesticides. Opponents say HR 1592 effectively would do away with the earlier act and endanger lives, especially of children. Between both sides are Web sites full of information and opinion. Members of Congress would do well to scan these sites before voting on the issue of when pesticides can be used.

The legislation was introduced in April 1999 by Rep. Richard W. Pombo, R-Calif., with 229 co-sponsors, including 162 Republicans and 67 Democrats. Among these are Republican Reps. Ron Paul of Surfside, Kevin Brady of The Woodlands and Tom DeLay of Sugar Land, the latter formerly associated with the pesticide industry.

Some backers of the legislation have received campaign contributions from anti-FQPA political action committees; some have helped constituents file Section 18 exemptions from the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act.

Some of the language in the bill appears to have been lifted bodily from a position paper of the Implementation Working Group, a coalition of pesticide makers, farming interests and food processors, all generally in agreement on modifying EPA's role in this matter.

The EPA, of course, hasn't done itself any favors, earning both kudos and scorn by its modus operandi. Pitting the EPA against hardworking American farmers can't help but elicit sympathy for the latter, even when potentially deadly pesticides are involved. But past resentments of EPA actions or threats should not prevent a level-headed assessment of the EPA's crucial role in regulating pesticide use on our food supply.

Enough questions have been raised about HR 1592 to warrant a careful look before leaping.



TYPE: Editorial Opinion

LOAD-DATE: June 2, 2000